There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

IOC leader says 'hate speech' directed at Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting is unacceptable | Africanews

IOC President Thomas Bach said the “hate speech” directed at boxers Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting at the Paris Olympics is “totally unacceptable.”

“We will not take part in a politically motivated … cultural war,” Bach said at a news briefing Saturday at the midway point of the Paris Games, where he wanted to draw a line under days of global scrutiny about the female boxers’ gender.

workerONE , (edited )

The prevalence of 46 XY in the female athletic population is about 7 per 1000 adults, which is 140 times greater than what is seen in the general population. For context, of the 4,676 women competing at the 2012 Summer Olympic Games in London, we would predict ~32 women competitors would have a 46 XY

Source: Bermon S, Garnier PY, Hirschberg AL, et al. Serum androgen levels in elite female athletes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(11):4328-4335

dexa_scantron , (edited )
@dexa_scantron@lemmy.world avatar

True, but largely irrelevant. There is no evidence that Khelif has XY chromosomes aside from an accusation by one corrupt Russian boxing official, made after Khelif beat a Russian boxer. They have not produced the test, said where it was done or what the results were.

Here’s an AP News article with lots of information on the IBA and why their claims about Khelif are suspect: apnews.com/…/olympics-2024-khelif-russia-boxing-b…

FlyingSquid , (edited )
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Someone in reply to me above inadvertently showed a very simple reason why they’re suspect by trying to prove they had accurate testing by sending me to the IBA’s own press release, which stated:

Point to note, the athletes did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognized test, whereby the specifics remain confidential.

They won’t even say how they tested her or who they administered the test. Just “we tested them, but not for testosterone, and believe us when we say the test results of the type of test we won’t tell you they took say they’re women.”

And people keep telling me this is about testosterone. So if they weren’t tested by the IBA for testosterone, why does testosterone matter?

dexa_scantron ,
@dexa_scantron@lemmy.world avatar

The simplest explanation is that they didn’t do any tests, and this whole kerfuffle is a very successful act of revenge on the IOC, Khelif, and the rest of the sports world.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I don’t think it matters either way. Until we’re told at the very least what the tests were or who administered them, any testing is irrelevant. They don’t even need to say what the results were. All they have to say is, “we did X test on them and Y doctor administered it and Z lab did the analysis.”

Did they test them? Who knows? Who cares until they give us the details?

rhombus ,

The AP article linked above even points out that it was three days after she beat a previously undefeated Russian newcomer. By disqualifying Khelif after the fact they retroactively made the Russian boxers record “perfect” again. Now they’re just trying to cause more issues after being stripped of their international recognition a few years ago.

Silentiea ,
@Silentiea@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Honestly, these ex post facto disqualifications seem pretty fishy to me to begin with. Shouldn’t qualification happen before a match, not after the results have already been decided?

rhombus ,

Totally, especially for something that the boxer has no control over. It’s clearly just a way for them to invalidate the results they don’t like.

workerONE ,

There’s so many people starting up discussions that aren’t factually relevant, like the testosterone discussion. Just wondering, why did you refer to the boxer as him? Maybe a typo?

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Yes. A typo. Fixing now. My apologies.

match ,
@match@pawb.social avatar

I’d also be interested in 46,XX athletes actually

Nomecks , (edited )

This simply indicates that this genetic makeup is advantageous in sports. I would imagine the average height and weight for both genders is probably out of the norm by a wide margin too.

thedeadwalking4242 ,

xy genetics are kinda like crack for physical activity. It’s probably one of the widest gaps between the biological sexs. xy sexed individuals have a large advantage unless under long term and early hormone suppression

Viking_Hippie , (edited )

The IOC being on the right side of history for once? Huzzah!

Snideness aside, credit where credit is due: though it shouldn’t be, this simple refutation of utter bigoted lunacy is very courageous, given the fucked up political climate, and should be applauded!

yournamehere ,

doubt it. would be a firstie. world boxing federation banned them both a while ago. woc and ioc hate each other. thomas bach lied in the interview when he said there was never any indication they wouldnt be women. so i am sure it is the wronf decision. as always.

Samvega ,

Are you saying there is evidence that these two cis-gendered women are not women?

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Weird how the IBA won’t produce that evidence, isn’t it?

Samvega ,

“It doesn’t matter whether we see the evidence or not. There’s someone who I don’t find attractive that is physically quite capable… SO IT MUST BE A MAN!!!”

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

“I know a man when I see one” has gotten so many cis women harassed because of transphobic bigots. Women with things like mustaches they don’t really feel like shaving every day.

My wife works with a woman like that. I haven’t talked to her about it because it’s none of my business, but I thought she was trans myself at first. I said to my wife that she must get harassed a lot as a trans woman with a flat chest and a mustache and my wife told me she wasn’t trans but gets harassed a lot anyway.

I try to be open-minded and accepting, but I made an assumption a cis woman was trans on sight anyway based on biases about what a woman “should” look like that I’ve been shown my whole life. I’m sure they’re no more expert than I am.

ipkpjersi ,

I’m sure you weren’t transphobic, though, and that’s the difference.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I do my best not to be. I don’t see any reason to be.

Cephalotrocity ,

Even weirder that the IAB disqualified them for having an innate advantage and they either appealed but withdrew it, or didn’t appeal at all as if they themselves believe the veracity of the claim.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Question for you: What were the tests the IAB administered and who administered them? Do you know? Because I don’t. And they’re refusing to say.

Does that not strike you as odd?

Also, if you knew you were being pushed out of a league due to bogus testing and it was coming from the top, why would you appeal?

Cephalotrocity , (edited )

It does strike me as odd, but not as odd as not going through with an appeal. At least with an appeal you have the dignity of refuting the, likely false, allegation and also have a chance to reveal what the ‘evidence’ is. Surrendering without a fight is not a good look imo.

Edit: while MY end of the following argument is cogent, out of respect for the accused I will point to new evidence that significantly discredits the IBA’s decision and competence. Their citing of an XY karyotype and/or excessive testosterone levels despite clearly stating testosterone and chromosome tests were NOT the initial reason for the DQs is simply baffling.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Suggesting tests are valid just because the results weren’t challenged in public is not how testing works.

Cephalotrocity ,

And suggesting they were invalid because they weren’t challenged is?

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Please quote me suggesting that.

Cephalotrocity ,

So why are you arguing then? You have no reason not to believe the accusations are true if you aren’t suggesting that.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I’m asking for evidence. They, and you, are making a claim. It is up to both of you to back up that claim.

You may accept evidence-free claims, I try not to.

And no, “they did not publicly challenge it” is not evidence of a valid test or valid results if the test is valid. Literally the only thing we know, because it’s all they told us, is that they did not test for testosterone.

Cephalotrocity ,

Tested, found to have an advantage, disqualified, refused to go through with an appeal. This is all evidence she has an unfair advantage and that neither party wants her personal information revealed to the public, which imo is fine. Not being sufficient evidence for you is not my problem. Bottom line this evidence is far more than the opposing viewpoint provides.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Tested,

Again, we have no idea what test or who administered it. Not evidence of test results.

found to have an advantage,

Since we don’t know what the test was, we have no idea what that advantage was. Again, not evidence.

disqualified,

Once again, we do not know what they were disqualified for.

refused to go through with an appeal.

Please tell me exactly what they would have had to do in order to make an appeal. Do you even know?

Cephalotrocity ,

… You’ve already made it clear you don’t think the evidence is sufficient for you but it was for both her and the IAB so…

Please tell me exactly what they would have had to do in order to make an appeal. Do you even know?

Irrelevant. She agreed to that process whatever it is when she signed on to compete.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

She agreed to that process

How do you know that? How do you even know there is an appeal process? Let’s see your information.

And you’re right, I don’t think “we gave her a test but we won’t tell you what it is” is sufficient, because it could be anything from genetic testing to inspecting their genitalia to someone deemed official walking in, saying, “I know a woman when I see one,” and leaving.

Cephalotrocity ,

Setting aside that a) I already mentioned 1 of the 2 appealed and withdrew it which obviates the existence of an appeals process, and b) that every child and parent of that has participated in an organized competition agrees to rules as far back as grade school, here is the actual IBA TECHNICAL & COMPETITION RULES. You’ll want to pay particular attention to Appendix 6 where the participant both agrees to testing and the appeals process.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

First of all, appendix 6:

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/f4f29e76-ab15-49ba-8024-4880f5bf8da8.png

That says nothing about gender at all, nor is it about gender. You’re being very dishonest and I’m not sure why. Did you think I wouldn’t check?

Secondly, you still haven’t explained to me why you don’t think how they were tested matters when the test, again, could be “I know a woman when I see one.”

Cephalotrocity ,

I’m not being dishonest, and I’d appreciate you avoiding personal attacks. I’m assuming you’d take the provided information and do your own due diligence because you’re so passionate about it. Obviously I was wrong.

How they were tested ofc matters. I just presume that if the participants agree to the testing before competing they felt it was appropriate and sufficient for the purpose which is why I don’t concern myself with absurd hypothetical testing procedures like “I know a woman when I see one”.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

You absolutely are being dishonest. It is not a personal attack. You told me to look at appendix 6. Why did you tell me to look at that if you weren’t being dishonest?

Did you mean appendix 7? Appendix 5? Which appendix was I supposed to look at?

I just presume that if the participants agree to the testing

What if she agreed to the testing because she was told if she didn’t, they would use their clout to make sure that she never boxed anyone again? What if she agreed to pull out of the appeal for the same reason? That would be in no way unprecedented in sports to threaten an athlete like that.

You don’t know how she was tested. You don’t know why she stopped the appeal. All you know is that she was tested for something and she decided it was worth appealing at some point, but ended that appeal for unknown reasons. And the thing she was tested for was not testosterone.

And based on all of that, you have decided that she is a man.

Cephalotrocity ,

Again, you’re calling me dishonest when I have done nothing but provide the information and guided you to key points within it to make your own due diligence easier. A lack of which is becoming more and more obvious the more you ad hominem instead of reading. Testosterone is not the only thing checked in the doping guidelines if you follow the chain of references.

And based on all of that, you have decided that she is a man.

I also have clearly not decided she is a man, hence my use of ‘she’ as pronoun many times in the past comments. Please improve your reading comprehension and critical thinking skills as your hostility is patently unfounded when all I’ve argued is that both of them did not full heartedly appeal which strongly suggests the disqualification is on solid grounds they agreed to beforehand.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I also have clearly not decided she is a man

Cool. So she can compete with other women whatever the test says. We’re in agreement.

Cephalotrocity ,

Not if she isn’t competing fairly.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

How would she not be competing fairly if she’s a woman?

Cephalotrocity ,

They were tested and found to violate the rules they agreed to which in my book means to compete unfairly.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Which rules did they violate? How do you know the test was fair?

Cephalotrocity ,

The rules stipulated in the contract. It was fair because they both agreed to them like everyone else does.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

And those rules were?

Cephalotrocity ,

They are in the link I provided which you’ve read so you should already know.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

The link where you claimed Appendix 6 showed the appeal process when it didn’t and haven’t shown where it would show the appeals process?

Sounds like you don’t know either. Which makes me wonder why you think any test at all would invalidate it apart from just taking the league at their word. A league the IOC has found to be completely corrupt.

Cephalotrocity ,

Oh, I know. I know the entire document is literally all the rules and that the appeals process is clearly specified in the bold text you literally pasted a photo of in here.

You clearly aren’t looking to argue in good faith or do the bare minimum of effort to verify information literally being spoonfed to you. Please: Do better.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

the appeals process is clearly specified in the bold text you literally pasted a photo of in here.

That was the appeals process regarding doping. Which you know. It has nothing to do with gender. If you don’t want me to call you dishonest, don’t be dishonest. Don’t accuse me of not arguing in good faith when you’re pretending the doping appeals process which applies specifically to charges of doping has anything to do with this.

You claim you know which rules they broke. Name them. Or is that more dishonesty?

Cephalotrocity ,

IBA disqualified athletes Lin Yu-ting and Imane Khelif from the IBA Women’s World Boxing Championships New Delhi 2023. This disqualification was a result of their failure to meet the eligibility criteria for participating in the women’s competition, as set and laid out in the IBA Regulations. Point to note, the athletes did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognized test. This test conclusively indicated that both athletes did not meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors.

You are arguing in bad faith. The decision was not regarding gender but due to the detection of “competitive advantages” which obviously falls under the doping rules.

Edit: link break repair.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

What exactly do you think makes you eligible for the women’s competition apart from being a woman?

Can you find the page in those rules that show which women are excluded from the women’s competition? Because I sure can’t.

Cephalotrocity ,

Are you seriously arguing there is no way to be DQ’d from Women’s Competition aside from not being female? Come on.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Yes, I am arguing that. You show me where in the rules it says ineligibility specifically from the women’s competition and not all competition.

Cephalotrocity ,

I’ve already shown you. Do your own work.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

That is simply a lie. You did not show me the rule. You showed me an appendix which specifically did not say what you said it did, then claimed you were wrong, then went back to claiming it said what it didn’t say.

Then you showed me a press release which did not show me which rule she broke.

I have no idea why you’re just outright lying now.

Cephalotrocity ,

You are lying. Period. I linked you the ENTIRE RULESET and merely pointed you to Appendix 6 for evidence of the testing and appeals process. Read the entire thing if you care about all the rules.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

You pointed me to something about doping.

You did not point me to the rule that excluded women from women’s competition but not all competition.

You can do the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” thing all you like, but you did not show me that rule.

Cephalotrocity ,

I’m not going to. Read the entire document, and follow up on the ADR once you know what that is (hint: it is linked in the rules I already gave you), and then the Prohibited List if you really want a comprehensive list of everything not-testosterone that can get you banned from women’s competition. Until then, you being uninformed only weakens your argument, not mine.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Nope. It’s a list of things that can get you banned from all competition. Not just competing with women. She was not banned from all competition.

Once again, dishonest.

Cephalotrocity , (edited )

Nope, misinformed.

Edit: And to make how evident this is, I’ll give an example that is both obvious and won’t support your unwillingness to read and consider the information given.

Testosterone is one of he prohibited agents on the list. If its presence bans all from participating in all competitions, and not just women’s, how is there even a male category? The answer is clear and when applied to the entire list as appropriate for each substance and competition class you should be able to realize how wrong you are.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

And more dishonesty. I told you multiple times and you pasted from the press release that they did not test for testosterone. They also never claimed that she was doping.

You know this and I know this. So why are you trying to lie about it?

Cephalotrocity ,

Seriously, I’m starting to think you are confusing ‘dishonesty’ for ‘speak words too good’. I expressly used the example that didn’t apply so you would have to apply it once you actually read the data.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

The thing is that, unlike you obviously, I read the document you provided which is why I know that there is nothing in there about only disallowing someone to compete in the women’s division.

Which is why I know you’re being dishonest.

But hey, feel free to prove me wrong and show me the rule that is not there. I’m sure it will be like the appendix regarding doping which has nothing to do with the discussion, which you admitted you were wrong about, then went back to claiming it’s relevant.

Cephalotrocity ,

See there you go again. I asked you previously to improve your critical thinking skills but it is clearly beyond you. Being hostile just because you refuse to put the smallest of efforts into seeing how reality works isn’t working though it is clearly your default MO. Don’t get angry at others just because you’re wrong and you know it, or don’t know it but can’t figure out why. It isn’t going to help you in the long run.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Again, I read the document. You clearly did not. Saying I’m wrong without showing the rule which only excludes people from competing with women is just more dishonesty because there is no rule.

I have no idea why you’re trying to gaslight me into this, but it won’t work because, yet again, I read the document you gave me to read.

Cephalotrocity ,

If read, did not understand (a continuing theme with you). I led the horse to water. I’m not going to try forcing it to drink. The answer to your incomprehension is obvious if you literally listen to what I’ve already told you a few posts back. At this point you don’t want to think about it and that isn’t my problem no matter how hard you try to make that the case.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Cool. There is still no rule in that book that only excludes a boxer from competing with women. That is a fact.

That’s just a fact.

You can try to weasel around that fact, you can pretend it isn’t a fact without actually showing the rule, you can gaslight, you can be condescending like you are and flaunt your intelligence, you can tell me I just don’t comprehend, but it is still a fact.

I read the document you told me to read. There is no rule. That is a fact.

Cephalotrocity ,

No no. It’s all in there. I’m not going to hold your hand anymore. The sky is blue no matter how hard you argue it isn’t.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Once again, gaslighting me won’t change the fact that there is no such rule.

The only way this is going to work for you is to show the rule. Which you can’t, because there is no such rule.

Yes, I know, you’ll claim you already showed me the rule. Cool. I have a bad memory. Show me again. Give me the page number of the rule that bars someone from competing with women only, but they can still compete with men.

Cephalotrocity ,

Not going to do your work for you. Give it up. You’re wrong, obviously so, and I refuse to belittle myself to cater to wilful ignorance.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Okay, I’m thinking you’re just a troll. I think I’ll just flag you as such and move on.

Cephalotrocity ,

Refusing to spoonfeed you information repeatedly does not make me a troll. You insisting you get your way else your opponent is a troll is trollish.

JonsJava ,
@JonsJava@lemmy.world avatar

I’m going to ban you for misinformation, gaslighting, and trolling.

Before I do, I wanted to explain why you’re so completely wrong.

ADR Article 2.1 through Article 2.11 - the rules, state, in short,

2.1: Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s sample

When trying to understand if the rule was breeched:

It is the Athletes’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.1.

2.2: Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.

Clarifying subsection:

It is the Athletes’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies and that no Prohibited Method is Used. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.

…and that’s it. There’s more, but nothing else defines what constitutes doping.

If someone produces the chemical, they are not introducing it to their system willingly or knowingly, therefore not doping.

AngryCommieKender ,

deleted_by_moderator

    •
    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    I appreciate it. However, in this case, based on their history, they look like just a new user to lemmy.world. They may have a different account for .ml though.

    yournamehere ,

    no. why?! I am saying Imane Khelif should not box olympia for a number of reasons. genZstupidness just has a reflex here fighting for “good”. they are tards! most otherwise very well boxing women do not want to box her. you seem to want unfair fights because of your superhero complex. both Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting have testosterone levels so she could beat you up.

    Samvega ,

    All women have testosterone levels, as their ovaries produce androgens. If you wish to police this, I would say that you need to set limits on testosterone across both males and females, as there are disparities in testosterone production in both groups.

    Your writing style is terrible. Have you received enough education to talk about biological issues? To me, your use of ‘tard’ is projection.

    Thanks for calling me ‘Gen Z’. As someone born in 1982, I must look young.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Their use of that word got their post deleted for ableism. I wish people didn’t think it was appropriate as an insult. I have seen so many disabled people bullied with that word and the longer version.

    Samvega ,

    Yes, the point of creating an outgroup is to bully them.

    yournamehere ,

    and these women just have too high testosterone levels. sorry english isnt my first language. and genY then…thos with zero empathy and childish reflexes.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    thos with zero empathy

    …says the person who uses a word that is used to bully the disabled.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Cool. Let’s see their evidence.

    yournamehere ,

    you dont have google in your country?

    iba.sport/…/statement-made-by-the-international-b…

    you want to force the women with normal testosterone levels to get beat up by her? top gentleman move!

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    The “evidence” at that link is:

    Point to note, the athletes did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognized test, whereby the specifics remain confidential.

    Which is quite convenient indeed. Especially since they don’t even say what that “recognized test” is or who administered it.

    Also-

    you want to force the women with normal testosterone levels to get beat up by her?

    So I assume this means men with low testosterone have to compete with women, right? Also, you must not have noticed that they were explicitly not given testosterone tests. Your link literally said so.

    yournamehere ,

    dream on. you fight the good fight. let her beat up all the boxing women in your country.they should stay out of olympia and wba. sport is about fairness. i do not care what men with low testosterone do, i care about women that get beaten unfairly in the olympics.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    yournamehere ,

    ask the many women that do not box her. you seem to be an expert at medicine, boxing, ehtics and everything else…or just some dumb fuck who sides with her out of reflex. the majority of people affected wants her out for good reasons. what do you want?

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    I never claimed to be an expert at anything.

    You say there should be fairness. How do you make it fair? What test do you do to ensure it’s fair? That’s what I want. But your response seems to be to insult me rather than explain it, so I’m guessing you don’t actually have an answer to this, you just think that “fake” women shouldn’t get to compete as women.

    So, again, how do you make it fair? How do you weed out the “not women” from the women?

    yournamehere ,

    again, as wba says: testosterone levels. thats how. nobody says she is a fake women. all i say is she should not compete as it is not fair.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    It was specifically announced that Khelif was not tested for testosterone by the IAB. They did not say what the test was, only that it was not testosterone.

    So then I guess it was acceptable for her to compete.

    yournamehere ,

    no. thomas bach lied. he said he had no other information. wba said they informed ioc multiple times. the ioc is just scum.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    From the IBA’s own website:

    Point to note, the athletes did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognized test, whereby the specifics remain confidential. This test conclusively indicated that both athletes did not meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors.

    iba.sport/…/statement-made-by-the-international-b…

    Or is the IBA lying about not testing her for testosterone?

    yournamehere ,

    again i said wba you dumb fuck.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Okay, well that’s not a thing, so…

    ChairmanMeow ,
    @ChairmanMeow@programming.dev avatar

    But… She has lost fights to other women in the past. So she’s evidently not beating up everyone.

    yournamehere ,

    not true. she lost when she wasnt even 20. so yeah when she was a kid grown women had a chance. so fair. i now fully understand your point: it is a reflex and you can not be rational.

    ChairmanMeow ,
    @ChairmanMeow@programming.dev avatar

    If you’re accusing other people of irrationality, maybe stick to the facts. Her last loss on her amateur boxing record was 2 years ago, when she was 23. Here’s a tweet by Amy Broadhurst who beat her then: x.com/amybroadhurst12/status/1818687351582789680

    She seems pretty clear that she thinks Khelif is a good boxer but certainly not so absurdly strong that she’s unbeatable no?

    yournamehere ,

    lol. did you read it? she said it is not cheating, she was born this way. to me this implies that also the winners think imane should not box. they even emphasized cheating. also you have no idea how boxing works, right? point system and so on? get lost.

    ChairmanMeow ,
    @ChairmanMeow@programming.dev avatar

    Are you dense? She literally says

    The fact that she has been beating by 9 females before says it all.

    Clearly indicating that she thinks there’s no danger or that there’s an obvious advantage that Khelif has that others don’t have. She emphasized cheating because that’s what morons are accusing Khelif of.

    If she thought Khelif shouldn’t box she would have said so. She explicitly didn’t.

    I think you need to work on your reading comprehension.

    hanrahan ,
    @hanrahan@slrpnk.net avatar

    you want to force the women with normal testosterone levels to get beat up by her? top gentleman move!

    Of course, it’s boxing being “beat up” is what happens. Should the last placed contestant get another go becase they got beatup?

    Unless the governing body want to separate contestants based on t levels, or how many pubes on their labia or some such, like a weigth class, then yes, if they can’t handle it and are going to lose that badly, go do gymnastics or whatever.

    No ones forcing any if these people to compete, so they only one forcing them to be beat up is themselves.

    jaybone ,

    I read the article and I still don’t get it. Why are these people not allowed to compete as women? Do they identify as men?

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    No. They identify as women. The IOC agrees. We don’t know how they were tested or what the test results actually were by the IBA since they aren’t being open about it. But it doesn’t matter because the IOC doesn’t accept IBA results.

    What’s funny is that a lot of the people arguing that these two women shouldn’t be competing with other women here on Lemmy keep arguing about sporting rules while ignoring the IOC’s saying that rules aren’t being violated.

    So much furor over two athletes in a sport which, I believe, has not even gotten to the medal stage yet. They may both be out by then.

    I wish the people so upset over these two would spend more time being upset about things like China doing a shitload of covert doping. That is an unfair advantage that they don’t seem to give two shits about. Because “man boxing women.”

    SeaJ ,

    Not sure about Lin Yu-ting but Imame was born female. Algeria does not allow transitioning so even if she wanted to transition, she could not legally. People are freaking out because the loser complained that she was fighting a ‘man’ because she lost so bad. She let her guard down and then leaned into a right hook. Por course that is going to fuck you up.

    njm1314 ,

    Extremely rare win by the IOC.

    werefreeatlast ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Empricorn , (edited )

    deleted_by_author

    •
    PapaStevesy ,

    The IOC leader

    MediaBiasFactChecker Bot ,

    Africa News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Africa News:
    > MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - France
    > Wikipedia about this source

    Search topics on Ground.Newshttp://www.africanews.com/2024/08/03/ioc-leader-says-hate-speech-directed-at-imane-khelif-and-lin-yu-ting-is-unacceptable/

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com | https://lemmy.world/c/support

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •