On Saturday, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) issued a surprising correction after claiming for a week that Algerian boxer Imane Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-Ting were actually born women and have Differences in Sexual Development (DSD), a range of rare conditions in which a person’s genitalia do not necessarily match with their chromosomes or hormone levels. In this weekend’s column, I cited that IOC claim that Khelif is not a transgender athlete. Yet, there remains considerable confusion on how the IOC and the boxing governing body is framing this issue and the question of gender.
IOC chief Thomas Bach said: “We have two boxers… who were born as women, raised as women, who have passports as women, who have competed for many years as women. And this is a clear definition of a woman.”
Bach chastised critics and warned them not to “confuse the two issues,” stressing that this was not “about the transgender issue.” However, he then confused many by saying “this is not a DSD case.”
The IOC later issued a correction:
In today’s IOC – Paris 2024 press briefing, IOC President Bach said: ‘But I repeat, here, this is not a DSD case, this is about a woman taking part in a women’s competition, and I think I have explained this many times.”
What was intended was:
‘But I repeat, here, this is not a transgender case, this is about a woman taking part in a women’s competition, and I think I have explained this many times.’
The key claim of the IOC is that both boxers were “born women.” Clearly, the identification on their passports (and how they were raised) can differ from country to country.
In 2023, the International Boxing Association (IBA) President Umar Kremlev explained the IBA’s decision to disqualify Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting and Algeria’s Imane Khelif from 2023 Women’s World Boxing Championships. While there remains confusion on the testing used by the IBA (or the reliability of those tests), it issued this statement:
“Based on DNA tests, we identified a number of athletes who tried to trick their colleagues into posing as women. According to the results of the tests, it was proved that they have XY chromosomes. Such athletes were excluded from competition.”
Various media also did their own “fact checks” with outlets like USA Today stating that the “outcries from anti-trans celebrities and politicians” were based on false claims and the boxers were born women.
NBC also cited “attacks from anti-LGBTQ+ conservatives online who claim they’re transgender.” It stressed that the IBA could not be trusted since the group was banned by the IOC. (IBA was banned for corruption and financial related issues).
Notably, buried down in the CNN report on the controversy is a line that would seem significant that “Khelif… has not said she has DSD.”
In the meantime, IOC spokesman Mark Adams has said that these determinations are left up to each sport’s international governing body because “they know their sport and their discipline the best,” Adams added that “I hope we all agree that we’re not calling for people to go back to the days of sex testing which was a terrible, terrible thing to do. This involves real people and we’re talking about real people’s lives here.”
Yet, it seems odd that such major criteria of qualification would be left up to each governing body. There should be a consistent rule across the Olympics. Yet, the Human Rights Watch maintains that gender testing violates fundamental rights to privacy and dignity.
My friend Marc Siegel, Fox medical analyst, argues that the testing side can be as simple as a hormone swab.
Media is still insisting that these are not transgender athletes. Many articles cited GLAAD and InterACT. On Sunday, GLAAD was insisting that Khelif is not transgender, but is now referring to the DSD claim as something the IOC has maintained:
Imane Khelif is a woman.
Imane Khelif is not transgender and does not identify as intersex.
Because Imane Khelif was disqualified from the 2023 International Boxing Association (IBA) championship due to an unspecified gender eligibility test, which has different eligibility criteria than the IOC, there have been unconfirmed reports that she may have a variation in her sex traits, also known as differences of sexual development (DSDs).
DSDs are a group of conditions involving genes, hormones and reproductive organs. According to the NIH, some people with DSDs are raised as female but may have sex chromosomes other than XX, or elevated testosterone levels.
Athletes with variations in their sex traits, or DSDs, are not the same as transgender athletes. Conflating the two is inaccurate.
It is not verified that Imane Khelif has a variation in sex traits or DSDs.
If you are confused, you are not alone.
Legally, there continues to be a debate on the criteria used in these competitions. However, the GLADD statements seems to suggest that there is uncertainty on the underlying facts.
Some of the confusion may be due to the use of transgender versus intersex.
There is a difference between transgender athletes and intersex athletes. Transgender refers to someone who has a gender identity that is not in alignment with their sex.
Intersex refers to someone who has reproductive anatomy or genes that align with conventional definitions of male or female, including different chromosomal profiles. ESPN explained that “an example is someone who is partially or completely insensitive to androgens, such as testosterone. They may be assigned female at birth but have XY chromosomes because of their body’s physiological insensitivity to androgens.”
The athletes defending these two boxers have supported the claim that they are intersex athletes who were born female but have chromosomal differences.
What is most striking about the boxing controversy is that there appears little agreement on the underlying facts and testing. It is not even clear what Khelif has claimed in the past on these issues. That seems curiously undefined and irregular for a classification criteria. That was brought home by the confusion of Bach himself in warning against confusion on the issues.
On Saturday, Khelif defeated another female contestant, Hungary’s Anna Luca Hamori and Taiwan fighter Lin Yu-Ting also won the day before to advance to the semi-finals.
This is Turley’s best brainstorm yet. Let’s forget about wars and border invasions and fake elections and assassination attempts and hyper inflation and hundreds of other issues with a real impact on our lives, and instead let’s argue about the difference between “Transgender” and “Intersex” as it applies to Olympic boxing in a godforsaken moral hellhole like France.
What better way to put food on the table and good government back in Washington and restore the promise of justice in America than arguing about a bunch of nihilistic trannies in France?
Divide competitors into divisions. Biologically female, biologically male, and hybrid. Let the first two be and compete among themselves as they’ve done historically, and the third can sort it out for itself.
Zzdoc1,
I agree!!
Now that human dignity is, with social progress, considered passe as it was in ancient times, and human rites are venerated, for purposes other than human viability, do sex and gender (i.e. sex-correlated attributes including sexual orientation) matter? This issue could be settled without affirmative discrimination, or in classes divided by assessments of objective metrics including force, kinetics, and structure robustness.
If that dense dictionary salad statement is intended to claim that equity could be established by using some kind of stringent handicapping system to create competitive classes across all sexes and genders, I agree in principle. In fact, I have proposed that solution on more than one occasion, but there are practical arguments against, as well. One of the most compelling of those is whether anyone would pay to see an event between two individuals matched by some abstract classification system, instead of a system of classes with which they can specifically identify, or specifically not identify. I suspect that many, or most, men are interested in watching men’s athletic events because they are men (and want to speculate how they would fare in such a contest), and in women’s events because they are not women (and therefore curious and/or aroused), and vice versa for women spectators. I don’t know that any such attraction would exist for classes segregated by athletic ability alone.
If God can think that the dinosaurs deserved to die, then he can think that humans deserve to die, too.
Great minds really do think alike.
You are cruel, unfair, unscrupulous, inconsiderate, unjust creatures that deserve to experience what the people of Hiroshima experienced.
Ann YOU are a self-important, ignorant child.
Really butthurt so many of us have happy, meaningful lives, surrounded by good friends and family while you wallow away in your self-inflicted misery.
Professional Turley is right that there is confusion about the facts. What we appear to know is that the two boxers were disqualified in 2023 because tests showed they had XY chromosomes. We have not been provided information about these tests. We also appear to know that their passports designate them as females and that they were raised as girls. This says little about their underlying biology. We know nothing about whether they went through some aspects of male puberty. We also know nothing about their testosterone levels, now or in the past. An athlete with XY chromosomes who experienced significant aspects of male puberty would not be a likely candidate to participate in women’s events, in any world concerned about fairness to women. We need to get back to basics.
Daniel 11:01am. Very reasonable approach. How they were raised, what’s on their passport are nonsensical measurements in what is basically a biologic issue. Your points are reasonable.
Males will be neutered. Females will be spayed. Gender (i.e. sex-correlated attributes) therapy will begin shortly following conception in order to mitigate disparities and privilege. Equity and inclusion will force equality of one color and class of human life. Good for competition. Good for climate progress.
Jonathan: I prefer my sports simple and clean. That’s why I am watching the men’s Olympics tennis final between Alcaraz and Djokovic. In tennis we always know the difference between the men and women!
Riggs vs. King?
The grift never ends
Why don’t XY chromosomes in a female sport fall under performance enhancing? That goes way beyond doping.
What outcome is more important? Good sports for women? Or blurred lines of gender in the name of inclusivity? If you hold that no female nose shall be broken by a male muscle jab, you get inclusivity in the domain of good sports for women.
Well, obviously the well being on one individual athlete is irrelevant compared to the establishment of the greater good of many to impose their feelings on others and to claim that those feelings constitute reality.
I hope to H3ll that was sarcasm. Considering the ludicrous cr@p passing for erudition currently (especially in this comment section) it might be prudent to identify it as such…
You can get away with anything if you claim to have a medical condition.
This needs to be viewed strictly within the context of competition. These competitors have an unfair advantage. How is it any different from the use of steroids or PEDs, all of which are banned? If any of the other female athletes had injected a bunch of TRT (testosterone replacement, often used outside of medical treatment, in conjunction with anabolic steroids), they would likely have been disqualified. 🤷🏽♂️ This has all gone waaaay too far.
while I AGREE generally speaking and will always hold that position: that men should not compete against women and visa versa UNLESS THE SPORT HAS STRUCTURED THE SPORT AS MIXED. (for instance, mixed doubles tennis, or mixed synchro diving (it’s a thing? apparently yes). I support a sport that structures the male/female “team” notion. But that can also be hacked by intentional efforts to sabotage the rule. For instance, two men, one identifying as a women, or one as intersex, or one who is trans ..but whom DOES have a male biological advantage. In both genomics and in biological chemistry/hormonal.
and this leads to a different and fundamental question that all of this bull corn will eventually end at:
Is there a distinct advantage that a certain male or female athlete has over another of the same biological reality, but that presents MORE versus a LESSOR degree of natural genomic and hormonal capability?
let me make this plain to understand: two discus throwers. One is a mountain of a man, almost 7 foot tall and has the natural testosterone function along with the apparent strength and speed of a near superman who is out distancing ever single other athlete by meters. not inches! He tests out as a naturally gifted athlete. no doping involved. There is going to eventually be a moment in time when it will be realized that there are in fact a certain fraction of athletes who have some biological advantages far beyond any others and this will mean that there will be a recognition that unless you are in fact a super human, you are just not going to be competitive and win gold medals. Right now, that has not happened, but eventually athletics organizations and sponsors will identify and then support only those athletes who are super human capable. This means the discussion sooner than later is going to come back to a different kind of discussion, that is just below the surface of this trans, intersex and transgender debate: is it fair to allow a super human athlete to compete against “normal” athletes? Will rules be applied to recognizing different genomic/biological and even size differences, including speed, vision, agility, recover time between different classes of human beings?
we sort of already do this: there is the Paralympics…and the special Olympics. We differ between men and women for the same basic reasons: that athletes compete fairly and that the competition and the honor of the sport is maintained. We do this with active anti doping testing also. The entire point of sports is not exclusively to prove out THE BEST! No, the point of sports and competition is to strive toward the best demonstration of fair competition. When that is achieved, we witness greatness. This becomes vital to a great society that respects fairness above all else.
how is it fair that a super human genomic atlas who possesses extraordinary hormonal output against others who do not??
it is the same question being asked now, about whether it is fair to allow a biological man, or male intersex, or male transgender to compete against women who do not have these genomic “advantages”.
I assert that both of these questions and concerns hit right at the center of a debate matter that will eventually arise:
are we all equal after all? and how should sports adapt policies that allow for fair competition.?
alas, I predict we will soon see the “open” and/or the “unlimited” olympics classification of athletes. it’s coming…even if we refuse to accept it. There WILL BE A NEW CLASS OF ATHLETES WHO WILL DOMINATE EVERY SINGLE SPORT. They will be super human by comparison. And THAT is what we really need to understand when considering fairness.
I’m not sure how fair competition happens in this new super human world. But it IS coming. Just a matter of time.
@regitiger
I’m of the same mind, but in these full contact sports a woman could easily be literally killed. That’s the end of the conversation for me, and common sense to me.
I actually don’t agree with your super athlete premise. Much of what we are seeing these days is due to alarmingly historically high PED use among younger people (worth researching, and separate from this particular topic’s focus), and it isn’t sustainable. Not sustainable at all.
We are knee deep in the quick fix generation that wants to win at any cost because they are so confused about their intrinsic value due to cultural rot that they think their survival literally depends on it. 🤷🏽♂️ Ironically, their methods of procuring achievement across the entire spectrum of life are what might kill them, or at least break them, prematurely.
PS –
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jAdG-iTilWU
😂😂
PPS –
Incidentally, that link is an old SNL skit about the ‘All Drug Olympics’, and it’s still funny. Should’ve been in the original comment, sorry for the lack of context.
When I played Peewee football, our age determined what team we would be on. We also had to weigh in before being allowed to play a game. This was done because some boys hit puberty early and they needed to protect the health and safety of the boys that didn’t have such a physical advantage.
These boxers have such an advantage. It doesn’t matter why, they just do. Protecting health and safety should trump privacy and dignity.
That is part of it. When the Olympics were truly amateur events, it might have been the most important part. However, nearly all Olympic athletes today are at least partially motivated by the remunerative rewards that will likely result from success, and should be making a rational calculation about the physical risk vs reward aspect of competition before embarking on their “amateur” career. The more important problem to me is that this imbalanced competition completely skews any prior rational calculation of “return on investment” (so to speak) that an female athlete may have made.
The posts on this site about this topic, and almost anything related to sex are pretty disgusting. Disgusting because of the server with which some make accusations Accusations about which they have zero, yes zero information. And why the preoccupation with sex? Learn some science. there are more than two possibilities with gender. XX, and XY are not the only possibilities. Learn some science, don’t be an imbecile.
*LORETTA
XX and XY do take the lion’s share. No one knows what damage evolution will produce in the future. Right now most people have 5 fingers on each hand.
Prof T might have consulted at least one geneticist .
You call others imbeciles and yet you want men to punch women, period.
Once again you’re showing your inability to read and comprehend. Where in the post does it say anything about men punching women? Learn some reading comprehension skills.
Learn implication. You ramble on with gobbledygook about shades of gender and yet the end result of your learned exposition is still men punching women.
Anonymous at 9:55
It’s my understanding that only XY and XX can reproduce– without artificial assistance.
What does that tell you?!
I have nothing to contribute.
I think that the matter is fairly simple in the context of the participation in women’s sports. Regardless of whether someone is transgender or intersex, if that person has a physical advantage as a result, fairness requires that the person is precluded from participating. Let’s not make it more complicated than it is.
I wrote about this just moments ago. read the comment.
“Regardless of whether someone is transgender or intersex, if that person has a physical advantage as a result, fairness requires that the person is precluded from participating. Let’s not make it more complicated than it is.”
actually, in your recommendation, complicated is inevitable.
who decides who has a unfair advantage?
is usain bolt an unfair advantage? venus williams? tiger woods? biles?
if you look at records, you might come to this position…that there are such incredibly talented athletes that the reality this causes is unfairness,
but is it?
or are there moments in time, when super athletes just happen? and break records?
isn’t that more of the truth about the fairness debate?
that is dismisses the reality and the high probability that over time, great athletes do happen and break records.
bob beaman held the long jump record for how many years? was that fair, or completely fair and represents one of the longest held records of human ability in all of history?
if you read my comments above, you might be persuaded to think I am opposed to the fairness aspect. I am most certainly not. Go back to my prior comments to get a view of where I believe sports is heading toward. We are in some ways, already in that normal human versus superhuman competition quandry.
is there fairness when a man bashes a woman’s face in boxing or leaves her in the dust in the 400 meter run?
no.
is there fairness when a 7 foot tall 350 point atlas with extraordinary genomics/physical traits and super powered hormonal output breaks the discus record by meters over any other athlete?
at the core, these are the same questions…about fairness!
but the real question: who decides what is fair?
So…it will be 2 dudes fighting for the gold medal in WOMEN”S boxing. Great!! Congrats on screwing up something so pure as sport.
The Olympics used to give sex tests to athletes before allowing them to compete. It was a simple cheek swab – nothing invasive, embarrassing or degrading. In 1999, they stopped requiring sex testing, which has been a huge disservice to female athletes because since that time, males have been creeping into the female category. In 2016, three males swept the women’s 100m track race; not one female medaled in that female event. The IOC must bring back required sex testing to ensure safety and fairness for Olympic athletes, especially in the female category. The Olympics are neglecting their duty to female athletes by providing a huge loophole for male athletes to enter as females. Whether these males are transgender or have a DSD is irrelevant. Either way, they must be kept out of the female category. Instead, the IOC continues to shirk their responsibility to female athletes in favor of these “special” male athletes.
*LORETTA
Maybe this issue was the reason behind ancient Greek nude sports competition.
I don’t feel comfortable with there being so many people on the planet. It would be a huge relief if many of them were destroyed somehow.
To settle the score, people must be made miserable somehow, to make up for all of the misery that they have ever caused me.
Maybe God can send a meteor to Washington, D.C.
The only person causing you misery is you.
The rest of us are perfectly indifferent to your misery.
Not according to my central nervous system.
Sounds like you have a medical condition.
And a mental one.
*LORETTA
Perhaps if he or she displays misery many can enjoy it, too.
I love to see you suffer thing…
BTW, last night the wife and I had “date” night. We went to a very nice restaurant. The food was great. We laughed. Enjoyed ourselves.
And today, we are going boating.
We are having a great weekend! 🙂
🤙✌️🫵👍👊👏
Well played sir!
OLLY,
Thank you!
Living well is the best campaign.
Why don’t you do us a very big favor, and begin that effort with yourself?