Transgender - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.

 

[Saint Shags]

This is exactly why athletes should be given an initial cheek swabs test, and then if there are any abnormal results, get further assessment done to find out what the actual case is. Great thread explaining how this can easily be achieved:

I think you missed the whole point of my post.
Simply saying that XY results mean that you are Male, are fraught with danger as the articles I have posted reveal.

Is it now a case of your chromosomes? What about the argument about ovaries?
The whole XX XY argument isn't as clear cut as some would have others to believe.

 

[Malifice]

Loving the cookers claiming 'there are only two sexes, male and female' struggling with how to place intersex people (close to 2 percent of the population of the Earth) in this neat (but self evidently false) little binary definition.

Cookers, can we at least be intellectually honest and say (objectively, and as scientific fact) that intersex people exist, and there are more than two biological sexes, and not everyone is (biologically) necessarily either a 'man' or a 'woman'?

Once we move past that little biological truth, we can move onto the social construct that we all call 'gender'.

 

[Gralin]

It's not fascist to have people voluntarily waive rights in order to participate in something, and it's not heading in that direction either. This happens all walks of life, particularly associated with different professions (mine being an example), and as I mentioned before, there's already a version of this that happens with drug testing of athletes! You're way off base here.

I mean what we are talking about is genetic testing to decide if someone can participate in sports, its not exactly a good starting place to be I wouldn't think.

But also, not everyone, just one section of the community, which again, yeah not a fan

I get that perfect solutions don't exist and compromises have to be made but I don't really want to start with anyone wanting to compete as woman has to pass a genetic test (which we will use to exclude women that don't meet certain criteria to be determined)

I have no issue with requiring the work to be done to ensure the system isn't abused. In fact, we should demand that to be the case with this, and with drug testing or any other comparable systems that involve our medical consent. Your arguments seemed to be, "It was a system prone to abuse previously, so we shouldn't consider going back to it," and I agree - don't go back to that system. Make a better one.

This has to, has to be the starting position if this is going to happen. I think if anything the IBA situation shows that we can't rely on sporting bodies to have this position.

We also can't rely on all governments to have this position.

There are a lot of issues with getting to this good safe and fair system if that is the end result (and the fair part will always be debated because not everyone is going to agree with whatever is decided)

I've never come across a problem where having less information has helped me to solve it.

I've never felt the need to genetically test someone who tells me they are a woman before accepting that as a truth myself but that is what is being proposed here

 

[ShanDog]

I think you missed the whole point of my post.
Simply saying that XY results mean that you are Male, are fraught with danger as the articles I have posted reveal.

Is it now a case of your chromosomes? What about the argument about ovaries?
The whole XX XY argument isn't as clear cut as some would have others to believe.

No, I didn't miss the point. You've oversimplified and misrepresented the nature of the conversation here. We have been discussing the nuances of DSDs for the last several pages.

 

[ShanDog]

Loving the cookers claiming 'there are only two sexes, male and female' struggling with how to place intersex people (close to 2 percent of the population of the Earth) in this neat (but self evidently false) little binary definition.

Cookers, can we at least be intellectually honest and say (objectively, and as scientific fact) that intersex people exist, and there are more than two biological sexes, and not everyone is (biologically) necessarily either a 'man' or a 'woman'?

Once we move past that little biological truth, we can move onto the social construct that we all call 'gender'.

Sorry Mal, you are WAY off.

Intersex people don't represent 2% of the population. The claim is actually 1.7% and it's a gross misrepresentation of the actual data and includes conditions that are not actually considered intersex. The real figure is closer to 0.018% but is very difficult for anyone to actually estimate.

And there are only two sexes. Intersex is not a third sex. Sex is indeed binary. Sex is based on reproduction of which there are only two possible forms for humans - production of either large or small gametes. Someone with a DSD (i.e. potentially an intersex person) has a disorder of development of one of the two sexes. There's no "new" third sex created.

This issue is difficult enough without misinformation.

 

[ShanDog]

I mean what we are talking about is genetic testing to decide if someone can participate in sports, its not exactly a good starting place to be I wouldn't think.

But also, not everyone, just one section of the community, which again, yeah not a fan

I get that perfect solutions don't exist and compromises have to be made but I don't really want to start with anyone wanting to compete as woman has to pass a genetic test (which we will use to exclude women that don't meet certain criteria to be determined)

Totally get the hesitation to get on board with something like this because of the way it would target one group. If there was another way, then it would be ideal.

I've never felt the need to genetically test someone who tells me they are a woman before accepting that as a truth myself but that is what is being proposed here

Not to prove they are a woman - that's not how I see it. You'll note I've always referred to Khelif as she when I've used pronouns (and I realise that not everyone will). The message has been drilled into everyone for years now - sex and gender are not the same. Khelif and Lin live as women and I've no issue with accepting that. When it comes to something that requires sex-segregation though, it's a different story.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I think you missed the whole point of my post.
Simply saying that XY results mean that you are Male, are fraught with danger as the articles I have posted reveal.

Is it now a case of your chromosomes? What about the argument about ovaries?
The whole XX XY argument isn't as clear cut as some would have others to believe.

According to the Harry Potter lady, men can now have ovaries, but women can't have testosterone.

The fact that ovaries produce testosterone is irrelevant.

 

[Saint Shags]

No, I didn't miss the point. You've oversimplified and misrepresented the nature of the conversation here. We have been discussing the nuances of DSDs for the last several pages.

No, you decided to quote my post to try and line it up to your thinking.
I simplified my statement so that there could not be any mistake.

I believe the tests not to be the panacea that some would hope it to be. As evidenced by the articles I posted.

If a person is born biologically as a woman who the **** are we to then say they are not a woman?

Should all new borns now be tested so that we can make sure that their body's characteristics haven't made a mistake?

What happens if a person has been born biologically as a woman, has lived their entire lives as a woman, mentrates as a biological woman but this fancy test says differently?

 

[ShanDog]

No, you decided to quote my post to try and line it up to your thinking.
I simplified my statement so that there could not be any mistake.

I believe the tests not to be the panacea that some would hope it to be. As evidenced by the articles I posted.

If a person is born biologically as a woman who the **** are we to then say they are not a woman?

Should all new borns now be tested so that we can make sure that their body's characteristics haven't made a mistake?

What happens if a person has been born biologically as a woman, has lived their entire lives as a woman, mentrates as a biological woman but this fancy test says differently?

All you said was, "XY doesn't tell us the full story".

No shit. We've been discussing that for ages.

Now you're trying to jam more talking points in.

 

[Saint Shags]

All you said was, "XY doesn't tell us the full story".

No shit. We've been discussing that for ages.

Now you're trying to jam more talking points in.

Yes but there are some that hold these XY tests to be the be all and end all of tests.

Yet there is clear medical examples of those with XY chromosomes being female in every damn shape but a chromosome test.

So which is the truth?
Do you believe that we should simply go off a chromosome test?

 

[ShanDog]

Yes but there are some that hold these XY tests to be the be all and end all of tests.

Yet there is clear medical examples of those with XY chromosomes being female in every damn shape but a chromosome test.

So which is the truth?
Do you believe that we should simply go off a chromosome test?

No because I'm not an idiot.

 

[Saint Shags]

No because I'm not an idiot.

Plenty out there think that's all it should.

 

[ShanDog]

Plenty out there think that's all it should.

And there are plenty of otherwise intelligent people who think sex is a spectrum, as evidenced earlier this page. There's a lot of ignorance and misinformation out there.

 

[big_e]

An IBA technical document for competition rules, says: “‘Women/Female/Girl’ means an individual with chromosome XX. For this purpose, the Boxers can be submitted to a random and/or targeted gender test to confirm the above, which will serve for the gender eligibility criteria for the IBA Competitions.”

It also says, in section 4.2, “To determine the gender, the Boxers can be submitted to a random and/or targeted gender test which will be conducted by IBA in cooperation with the selected laboratory personnel.”

Those rules were changed AFTER these women were disqualified.

Here is the IBA technical and competition rules as of 3 February 2023, the month before the world championships: https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/20230209-IBA-Technical-Competition-Rules.pdf

And here is the same document, published in May 2023, ie after the world champs:

https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/20230513-IBA-Technical-Competition-Rules29.pdf

On page nine, at the end of the section of definitions, the line referencing the XX chromosome is in the second one but not the first.

Also consider section 4.2 about gender eligibility, it's simply not there in the rules they competed under at the world championships. (There's a different section 4.2, which is now 4.3 in the later document.)

They've made up the rules to justify their disqualification of those women, but only after they did it.

 

[Gralin]

And there are plenty of otherwise intelligent people who think sex is a spectrum, as evidenced earlier this page. There's a lot of ignorance and misinformation out there.

If you incorrectly think that gametes are the only thing that matters sure

 

[ShanDog]

If you incorrectly think that gametes are the only thing that matters sure

No, it's not the ONLY thing, but sex is entirely about the role within procreation. The size of gametes is a massive part of that.

 

[The Tilt]

If you incorrectly think that gametes are the only thing that matters sure

Plenty of things matter. It remains the case that sex is defined with reference to gametes. There are exactly two sexes, because there are two types of gamete (ova and sperm).

And no, intersex is not a third sex.

 

[Gralin]

Plenty of things matter. It remains the case that sex is defined with reference to gametes. There are exactly two sexes, because there are two types of gamete (ova and sperm).

And no, intersex is not a third sex.

No im not saying there is a third sex, that would be you jumping ahead

No, it's not the ONLY thing, but sex is entirely about the role within procreation. The size of gametes is a massive part of that.

Yes a massive part I agree

But not the only part and when people say sex is a spectrum they're talking about the whole package

Gametes, chromosomes, hormones, secondary characteristics.

There is more to it than just gametes, there is more to people than just their ability or inability to reproduce and trying to put human biology into a little box marked sperm or ova is an oversimplification of complex reality

 

[Balls In]

As it pertains to these intersex boxers the end result is that XY humans have smacked their way through multitudes of XX humans to reach the top of a women's event. Statistically you'd have more chance walking up to strangers in the street and guessing their mobile phone numbers than for this to be a coincidence.

 

[BlueE]

Those rules were changed AFTER these women were disqualified.

Here is the IBA technical and competition rules as of 3 February 2023, the month before the world championships: https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/20230209-IBA-Technical-Competition-Rules.pdf

And here is the same document, published in May 2023, ie after the world champs:

https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/20230513-IBA-Technical-Competition-Rules29.pdf

On page nine, at the end of the section of definitions, the line referencing the XX chromosome is in the second one but not the first.

Also consider section 4.2 about gender eligibility, it's simply not there in the rules they competed under at the world championships. (There's a different section 4.2, which is now 4.3 in the later document.)

They've made up the rules to justify their disqualification of those women, but only after they did it.

This was discussed in some detail in the first document linked in a report by by Alan Abraham from Wire sports on 3rd Aug 2024, linked previously.

IBA letter to IOC, June 2023: Boxer's 'DNA was that of a male consisting of XY chromosomes' | 3 Wire Sports

PARIS – The athlete who has ignited a worldwide controversy in Olympic women’s boxing was disqualified from the 2023 International Boxing Assn. world championships in New Delhi after two tests, one in India amid that tournament and a prior test in Turkey in May 2022, “concluded the boxer’s DNA was t

www.3wiresports.com

An IBA technical document, effective May 13, 2023, says this: “‘Women/Female/Girl’ means an individual with chromosome XX. For this purpose, the Boxers can be submitted to a random and/or targeted gender test to confirm the above, which will serve for the gender eligibility criteria for the IBA Competitions.”

It also says, in section 4.2, “To determine the gender, the Boxers can be submitted to a random and/or targeted gender test which will be conducted by IBA in cooperation with the selected laboratory personnel.”

A prior version – effective February 9, 2023 – holds no such references.

The 2023 women’s world championships were held in March.

In May 2022, during the IBA women’s world championship in Istanbul, Lin and Khelif underwent chromosome tests, which were processed locally at a lab.

IBA minutes from March 25, 2023, the day before that tournament closed, indicate the results of the 2022 worlds tests “were received only upon the conclusion of the event, hence the athletes were not disqualified back then.”

Again, the next world championships would be in March 2023 in New Delhi. Why were both athletes allowed to take part?

“Another test was not possible to conduct when the athletes were outside IBA control until they arrived to New Delhi,” the minutes read.

In New Delhi, another test for each, “to reconfirm the findings of the initial test, which it did,” according to the June 2023 letter the IBA sent to the IOC.

The New Delhi lab reports for both Khelif and Lin say the same thing:

Result Summary: “Abnormal”

Interpretation: “Chromosomal analysis reveals Male karyotype.”

A karyotype means an individual’s complete set of chromosomes. Females have XX chromosomes, males XY.

The lab results for each athlete depict the XY chromosomes photographically.

The IOC asserts both athletes were DQ’d without due process.

The IBA minutes do say, as the IOC has said, that the decision to disqualify was made by the IBA secretary general at the time and that the board was asked to ratify that move.

At the same time, the minutes also make clear that – in the case of Khelif – the acting Algerian ambassador was present at that March 25, 2023, meeting and “invited to present the Algerian position and requested a second opinion on the issue.”

A majority of the board voted to approve the disqualifications, with one abstention and one no, Jose Laureano of Puerto Rico. Laureano then suggested that the IBA establish a “clear procedure on gender testing.” The new rules were in place by May.

The IBA said in a statement that Lin did not appeal the IBA disqualification to the Swiss-based Court of Arbitration for Sport, “thus rendering the decision legally binding.”

Khelif, the IBA said, initially lodged an appeal with CAS but dropped the case, “also making the IBA decision legally binding.”

The IBA from it's earlier Technical and Rules manual on 'Athlete Eligibility' 4.2.1. IBA has the right to make a final decision regarding a Boxer’s eligibility and the ban was ratified by the board of the IBA because the XY chromosomes from two separate tests at two independent labs identified both boxers as men competing against women and ineligible.

As suggested by a board member Laureano of Puerto Rico the IBA did establish a clear procedure on gender testing and eligibility which were described in the 13 May 2023 document.

It is the IOC that refused to respond to or act upon the evidence of male chromosome test results attached to a letter from the IBA in June 2023 because establishing gender legibility for them is a social construct, proved by your passport identification.

It is not protecting the integrity or safety of women's sports. And making women apologise for daring to voice concerns or protest.

 

[Chief]

The IBA from it's earlier Technical and Rules manual on 'Athlete Eligibility' 4.2.1. IBA has the right to make a final decision regarding a Boxer’s eligibility and the ban was ratified by the board of the IBA because the XY chromosomes from two separate tests at two independent labs identified both boxers as men competing against women and ineligible.

Kind of makes all of the talk of a spectrum pretty redundant.

 

[BlueE]

Kind of makes all of the talk of a spectrum pretty redundant.

If they are males that went through male puberty it would.

As I've previously said, by definition there are over 60 conditions under the umbrella of DSD.

Differences in sex development (DSD) is a group of rare conditions involving genes, hormones and reproductive organs, including genitals.

Conditions that in this case might mean incorrect genital identification at birth.

Once again taking a few words out of context for a gotcha! How brave.

You realise that the IBA updated and established clear standards for gender eligibility, which establishes a starting point to protect the integrity and safety of women sport.

 

[Chief]

"Might mean".

OK. Sounds like something we should definitely be kicking people out of sport over.

 

[BlueE]

"Might mean".

OK. Sounds like something we should definitely be kicking people out of sport over.

That's not what I said.

Again think you have a gotcha taking two words out of context.

Stunning and brave.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

You realise that the IBA updated and established clear standards for gender eligibility, which establishes a starting point to protect the integrity and safety of women sport.

Make Boxing Safe Again