Thank you for posting this article. As a believing Christian, I have been horrified and saddened by all of the misinformation and slander being spread about these two athletes. It seems that as you said, people cannot get beyond their own phobias to actually see the facts as they are. Or else, they don’t want to see the facts, but want to spread a political agenda.
Ta, Robyn. Gender is a spectrum, not a duality. When we were kids, Younger Sister was offered a drink from the garden hose by a boy who lived on our corner. Had I not come along when he was trying to shove the hose down her throat, she might not be among the living. He was XYY. That extra Y chromosome made him a danger to himself and others. To my knowledge, he never killed another human, but he did end his own life.
Just so I’m clear, we’re still okay with men beating up men and women beating up women for entertainment? What about the High Jumping To Conclusions event?
This is what TERFs and transphobes are, and what they do. Having made a satisfactory (to them) start on demonising trans women, they're moving onto the next line of That Poem.
Now they're coming after cis women who aren't sufficiently "feminine". It was only a matter of time.
Imagine trying to demonise a boxer for punching her opponent in the head.
THAT'S THE POINT OF THE SPORT. Imagine trying to demonise an Olympic athlete for "shattering" her opponent's dream of winning a gold medal. THAT'S THE POINT OF COMING TO THE OLYMPICS.
This is your brain on transphobia. Just say No, folks.
At least JK Rowling will be remembered for more than just one thing. Wizard books, and hateful rhetoric about other people’s lives that should have no bearing on her life whatsoever.
Yep, The "We gotta keep the trans out!" trope relies on the idea that all trans women want to compete in athletics, and all of them will be super athletes that will do better than every cis woman.
Throughout the last two centuries (at least) there has been a consistent movement to keep out of athletics persons who don't fit a platonic ideal of who should be allowed to compete. Professionals versus amateurs (remember the coach not allowed in the Olympic Stadium in Paris a century ago, in Chariots of Fire). Immigrants versus "Americans". Blacks versus whites. Girls versus boys.
It's tragic that the person who made so many kids who did not fit into roles society assigned to them happy for her vibrant defense of "mudbloods" and "squibs" in the Harry Potter books has decided to dedicate her life to her hatred of people who don't fit an outmoded and cruel gender stereotype about which her knowledge is far outstripped by the size of her megaphone.
standard for participation involving certain tests conducted in Turkey and India.
I'm aware although IBA is now run by sketchy Gazprom cronies….one cannot be dismissive of allegations unless those test results are revealed. That would also elucidate the efficaciousness of those tests.
This boxer and another one filed an appeal against the IB(F..or A..or whatever) results, and as the process went on ,they withdrew their appeal.
Obviously it may be that the process was flawed or bigoted.
But it may also be malpractice on the behalf of these athletes. Until transparency ensues within the different testing regimes conducted by the different bodies, its all speculative.
Nobody knows.
You may be just as much full of shit as Fox news and the GOP bigots.
Yes. I stand by it. An optimally designed scientific test conducted in a lab is very much a possibility even under the auspices of a corrupt sporting organization. The sporting world is chock full of these instances. If we mapped the reputation of an institution to the efficacy of lab tests(revealed or not), it would not be reflective of an isomorphism or a one to one mapping..where you can conclude..bad institution, therefore bad tests.
You do realize that the reason "transparency" does not now "ensue" is because the IBA personnel, or former personnel, who made and were complicit in the decision to ban those boxers refused to defend or justify their decision, or even reveal the basis for it? And that they still refuse?
And you do realize that the IOC decided to get rid of the IBA in large part because its decisions were sketchy and made by corrupt individuals, right?
If you do, then why on Earth would you be willing to give the erstwhile IBA or its "testing regime" the benefit of the doubt? About these two boxers, or about anything at all?
Yes I do. And I've stated the sketchiness of the IBA, explicitly. That doesn't mean the tests are necessarily less complete as a scientific test. It may be the case, but it's not necessary.
So, we have no empirical basis to accept or negate any hypothesis., currently.. regardless of the social and political context.
That's why it's important to not map an ad hoc sociological analytical framework onto an empirically demonstrable scientific test that hasn't been conducted, or may have been conducted under dubious control mechanisms as far as the statistical design of the test itself.
Yes,by that rationale both these athletes would still be currently eligible under IOC rules; but going forward,the completeness and efficaciousness of these tests will be the focus...rather than speculative , ad hoc sociologcal mapping of what constitutes eligibility with regards to male or female athletes.
Oh for the love of Christ. You can use words like "empirical" and "sociological" and "statistical design" all you want in an effort to look scientific and rational, but all you're doing is lending preemptive credibility to an organization that was disgraced for good reasons. And considering what a jerk you've been to others downthread, I doubt you're arguing in any kind of good faith.
So enough of you and the transphobia that you seem compelled to drape in polysyllabic, pseudoscientific garbage.
Self absorbed posturings in your defensive posture sans any relevant information paints a picture of you as someone desperate to believe their own bullshit.
The IBA *refused to say* what kind of tests were used. They showed no test results Occam's Razor: there were no tests, they were cheating to punish her for beating their woman.
You are erroneous in your assumption that "tests" weren't taken.
That fact is not disputed by anyone, including the athletes themselves.
As in, they directly petitioned themselves,and withdrew the petition subsequently.
Nobody in the general public knows what kind of tests they took in two different, independent labs based in Turkey, India(other than it was DNA based).
But they did take them,because they petitioned and withdrew their petitions during the process of testing.
That may be for legitimate reasons,no doubt. It may also not .
As I stated , it's speculation unless the efficacy of those tests are on display. At this point,absolutely possible the IBA are bigoted scum, but it's equally likely that these athletes are frauds.
You seem to have drawn conclusions that may or may not be true.
"Nobody in the general public knows what kind of tests they took in two different, independent labs based in Turkey, India(other than it was DNA based)."
So we take on faith the conclusions from tests nobody has identified?
"Frauds". Explain how Imane Khelif, who was born female and has always lived as female in a country where gender change is impossible, could be "frauding" anyone.
Nope. You've got no proof. You've got no citations. You've just got assertions. There were no tests until you post validated links that there were tests.
The dispute between the IBA and IOC yields statements that are verifiable to the degree these bodies allow verification.
Neither you,nor me will know.
Just because you can't accept that, it doesn't change the fact that there are gaps available in the testing regime that are exploitable by interested parties
I tend to assume that a person identifying as a woman and representing a homophobic and transphobic polity is actually a woman by any reasonable definition. And if someone conducts a "test" and won't reveal either the procedure or the results, that someone has got something to hide.
I can speculate on what science would reveal about what sexual gender you are, but without an unbiased lab and transparency about the test, it is useless to even bring up in conversation.
What makes your speculation so special that you can do(reduce margin of error in terms of a prediction) what the rest of us non qualified individuals can't,may I query?
For the record, the Latin prefix cis- means "on the near side of", and trans- means "on the far side of". So, for example, in his book on his conquest of Gaul (roughly modern France), Julius Caesar refers to the part of Gaul on Rome's side of the Alps as "Gallia Cisalpina", and the part on the far side of the Alps as "Gallia Transalpina".
So the use of cis and trans as gender identity indicators is the most natural use of language imaginable. If your gender identity is near what you were assigned at birth, you're cisgender, or cis for short. If your gender identity is on the other side of the traditional gender boundary from what you were assigned at birth, you're transgender, or trans for short.
If we'd just start teaching people classical Greek and Latin in high school again, we could avoid so many pointless arguments built on abject ignorance. Some basic training in critical thinking skills wouldn't hurt, either.
Anyone here who keeps up with my nonsense knows I'm a trans woman. And this crap from TERFs and assholes pisses me right the absolute fuck off.
We know that these two boxers are cisgender women. The IOC knows. The IBA/Russia knows. And Musk and Joanne know--or they would if they did even the faintest shred of reading. But they won't. And even if they did, they're so set in their fucking mindsets that no amount of evidence of any kind whatsoever would make them even give the vague appearance of an apology.
My mom has to much testosterone. She had to go on HRT to get pregnant. 🙄 I have an abundance of estrogen and a spare ovary. 🤷♀️ human bodies are interesting and complex.
And they always have been. Examples abide throughout history and not just Western history. Previous generations may not have had quite the language to describe it, but it's pretty clear they were aware there were lots of people who didn't fit into exact categories. X and Y chromosomes have been known about since 1905. I don't think the Bible was aware of them.
I would like to see Rowling's victims sue her for all the money her audience gave her when she conned them into thinking she wasn't the lowest kind of Muggle bigot.
The boxer needs to SUE the hell out of them all.
Thank you for posting this article. As a believing Christian, I have been horrified and saddened by all of the misinformation and slander being spread about these two athletes. It seems that as you said, people cannot get beyond their own phobias to actually see the facts as they are. Or else, they don’t want to see the facts, but want to spread a political agenda.
Thank you for the being the voice of calm and sanity.
Ta, Robyn. Gender is a spectrum, not a duality. When we were kids, Younger Sister was offered a drink from the garden hose by a boy who lived on our corner. Had I not come along when he was trying to shove the hose down her throat, she might not be among the living. He was XYY. That extra Y chromosome made him a danger to himself and others. To my knowledge, he never killed another human, but he did end his own life.
So it all comes back to Russia.
Again.
Asking Ms. Rowling for a friend:
Just so I’m clear, we’re still okay with men beating up men and women beating up women for entertainment? What about the High Jumping To Conclusions event?
This is what TERFs and transphobes are, and what they do. Having made a satisfactory (to them) start on demonising trans women, they're moving onto the next line of That Poem.
Now they're coming after cis women who aren't sufficiently "feminine". It was only a matter of time.
Imagine trying to demonise a boxer for punching her opponent in the head.
THAT'S THE POINT OF THE SPORT. Imagine trying to demonise an Olympic athlete for "shattering" her opponent's dream of winning a gold medal. THAT'S THE POINT OF COMING TO THE OLYMPICS.
This is your brain on transphobia. Just say No, folks.
At least JK Rowling will be remembered for more than just one thing. Wizard books, and hateful rhetoric about other people’s lives that should have no bearing on her life whatsoever.
It’s fucking sexist to suggest that every born male body is naturally better at “sports” than every born female body, full stop.
Babe Didrikson Zaharias supports this statement.
Yep, The "We gotta keep the trans out!" trope relies on the idea that all trans women want to compete in athletics, and all of them will be super athletes that will do better than every cis woman.
Throughout the last two centuries (at least) there has been a consistent movement to keep out of athletics persons who don't fit a platonic ideal of who should be allowed to compete. Professionals versus amateurs (remember the coach not allowed in the Olympic Stadium in Paris a century ago, in Chariots of Fire). Immigrants versus "Americans". Blacks versus whites. Girls versus boys.
It's tragic that the person who made so many kids who did not fit into roles society assigned to them happy for her vibrant defense of "mudbloods" and "squibs" in the Harry Potter books has decided to dedicate her life to her hatred of people who don't fit an outmoded and cruel gender stereotype about which her knowledge is far outstripped by the size of her megaphone.
I don't know much about this issue.
She did fail the IB.. (something)
standard for participation involving certain tests conducted in Turkey and India.
I'm aware although IBA is now run by sketchy Gazprom cronies….one cannot be dismissive of allegations unless those test results are revealed. That would also elucidate the efficaciousness of those tests.
This boxer and another one filed an appeal against the IB(F..or A..or whatever) results, and as the process went on ,they withdrew their appeal.
Obviously it may be that the process was flawed or bigoted.
But it may also be malpractice on the behalf of these athletes. Until transparency ensues within the different testing regimes conducted by the different bodies, its all speculative.
Nobody knows.
You may be just as much full of shit as Fox news and the GOP bigots.
"I'm aware although IBA is now run by sketchy Gazprom cronies….one cannot be dismissive of allegations unless those test results are revealed."
What?
You realise you're saying here that you have to accept their conclusions BECAUSE they haven't actually told you how they got them.
That's a very strange way of understanding things.
No. I specifically stated that these athletes should be allowed to box until tests are reconciled for incompleteness and consistency.
"I'm aware although IBA is now run by sketchy Gazprom cronies….one cannot be dismissive of allegations unless those test results are revealed."
You specifically said this, and I quoted it.
Yes. I stand by it. An optimally designed scientific test conducted in a lab is very much a possibility even under the auspices of a corrupt sporting organization. The sporting world is chock full of these instances. If we mapped the reputation of an institution to the efficacy of lab tests(revealed or not), it would not be reflective of an isomorphism or a one to one mapping..where you can conclude..bad institution, therefore bad tests.
"Until transparency ensues"?
You do realize that the reason "transparency" does not now "ensue" is because the IBA personnel, or former personnel, who made and were complicit in the decision to ban those boxers refused to defend or justify their decision, or even reveal the basis for it? And that they still refuse?
And you do realize that the IOC decided to get rid of the IBA in large part because its decisions were sketchy and made by corrupt individuals, right?
If you do, then why on Earth would you be willing to give the erstwhile IBA or its "testing regime" the benefit of the doubt? About these two boxers, or about anything at all?
I don't think we're the ones full of shit here.
Yes I do. And I've stated the sketchiness of the IBA, explicitly. That doesn't mean the tests are necessarily less complete as a scientific test. It may be the case, but it's not necessary.
So, we have no empirical basis to accept or negate any hypothesis., currently.. regardless of the social and political context.
That's why it's important to not map an ad hoc sociological analytical framework onto an empirically demonstrable scientific test that hasn't been conducted, or may have been conducted under dubious control mechanisms as far as the statistical design of the test itself.
Yes,by that rationale both these athletes would still be currently eligible under IOC rules; but going forward,the completeness and efficaciousness of these tests will be the focus...rather than speculative , ad hoc sociologcal mapping of what constitutes eligibility with regards to male or female athletes.
Oh for the love of Christ. You can use words like "empirical" and "sociological" and "statistical design" all you want in an effort to look scientific and rational, but all you're doing is lending preemptive credibility to an organization that was disgraced for good reasons. And considering what a jerk you've been to others downthread, I doubt you're arguing in any kind of good faith.
So enough of you and the transphobia that you seem compelled to drape in polysyllabic, pseudoscientific garbage.
I don't think I've been a jerk to anyone who didn't deserve scorn for being arrogant, accusatory, in the first place. Let's put it that way.
I think it's fair, then, to say others disagree with this position.
"pseudoscientific"
You know you're full of shit,and projecting.
Your brain can't convince that scientific tests are not a popularity contest.
What "scientific tests"? You've already said they haven't released their details and refuse to do so.
Not releasing details doesn't mean they haven't been conducted.
Conceive. That was a typo
"look scientific".
Its not about winning a popularity contest.
Apparently,it is..to you
But never as full of shit as you, bae.
Self absorbed posturings in your defensive posture sans any relevant information paints a picture of you as someone desperate to believe their own bullshit.
Hi, JK.
Hi Tosca.
The IBA *refused to say* what kind of tests were used. They showed no test results Occam's Razor: there were no tests, they were cheating to punish her for beating their woman.
Occam's Razor....inapplicable.
There were tests,because both athletes took them.
Thats not disputed.
They withdrew their petitions during the process.
I agree it's(IBA) shady ,but that doesn't mean both parties aren't shady.
Until one has tests that are transparent, nobody knows. Its all speculation.
"There were tests,because both athletes took them.
Thats not disputed."
Yes it is. What tests were these?
You are erroneous in your assumption that "tests" weren't taken.
That fact is not disputed by anyone, including the athletes themselves.
As in, they directly petitioned themselves,and withdrew the petition subsequently.
Nobody in the general public knows what kind of tests they took in two different, independent labs based in Turkey, India(other than it was DNA based).
But they did take them,because they petitioned and withdrew their petitions during the process of testing.
That may be for legitimate reasons,no doubt. It may also not .
As I stated , it's speculation unless the efficacy of those tests are on display. At this point,absolutely possible the IBA are bigoted scum, but it's equally likely that these athletes are frauds.
You seem to have drawn conclusions that may or may not be true.
"Nobody in the general public knows what kind of tests they took in two different, independent labs based in Turkey, India(other than it was DNA based)."
So we take on faith the conclusions from tests nobody has identified?
"Frauds". Explain how Imane Khelif, who was born female and has always lived as female in a country where gender change is impossible, could be "frauding" anyone.
That's a sociological, ad hoc critique that you seem to be stuck in.
That's not how eligibility is determined in categorizing men's and women's sports.
That's not a scientific method of determining eligibility.
I don't think you seem to get that.
Nope. You've got no proof. You've got no citations. You've just got assertions. There were no tests until you post validated links that there were tests.
Those aren't my assertions.
How the fuck would I know?
The dispute between the IBA and IOC yields statements that are verifiable to the degree these bodies allow verification.
Neither you,nor me will know.
Just because you can't accept that, it doesn't change the fact that there are gaps available in the testing regime that are exploitable by interested parties
Go to the IBA website, and the IOC website.
Don't believe me.
Check yourself.
I don't need to post links.
Do the work yourself,since you're so convinced about your axiomatic take on something you can never be privy to.
"I don't know much about this issue."
Well, that's obvious.
I tend to assume that a person identifying as a woman and representing a homophobic and transphobic polity is actually a woman by any reasonable definition. And if someone conducts a "test" and won't reveal either the procedure or the results, that someone has got something to hide.
" I tend to assume...".
That's the problem.
Unless there's transparency with tests nobody knows.
And the possibility exists that the athletes in question are frauds.
And you're speculating on something scientifically verifiable,with sociological ad hocism .
"And the possibility exists that the athletes in question are frauds."
How are they "frauds"?
I can speculate on what science would reveal about what sexual gender you are, but without an unbiased lab and transparency about the test, it is useless to even bring up in conversation.
What makes your speculation so special that you can do(reduce margin of error in terms of a prediction) what the rest of us non qualified individuals can't,may I query?
I think, in part, it's that you seem very credulous about the results of a test you yourself have said nobody has actually revealed details of.
It's weird that you're positioning yourself as a sceptic when you appear to be willing to accept literally nothing as the basis of your scepticism.
Lol MAY I QUERY
Weirdo
For the record, the Latin prefix cis- means "on the near side of", and trans- means "on the far side of". So, for example, in his book on his conquest of Gaul (roughly modern France), Julius Caesar refers to the part of Gaul on Rome's side of the Alps as "Gallia Cisalpina", and the part on the far side of the Alps as "Gallia Transalpina".
So the use of cis and trans as gender identity indicators is the most natural use of language imaginable. If your gender identity is near what you were assigned at birth, you're cisgender, or cis for short. If your gender identity is on the other side of the traditional gender boundary from what you were assigned at birth, you're transgender, or trans for short.
If we'd just start teaching people classical Greek and Latin in high school again, we could avoid so many pointless arguments built on abject ignorance. Some basic training in critical thinking skills wouldn't hurt, either.
Anyone here who keeps up with my nonsense knows I'm a trans woman. And this crap from TERFs and assholes pisses me right the absolute fuck off.
We know that these two boxers are cisgender women. The IOC knows. The IBA/Russia knows. And Musk and Joanne know--or they would if they did even the faintest shred of reading. But they won't. And even if they did, they're so set in their fucking mindsets that no amount of evidence of any kind whatsoever would make them even give the vague appearance of an apology.
My mom has to much testosterone. She had to go on HRT to get pregnant. 🙄 I have an abundance of estrogen and a spare ovary. 🤷♀️ human bodies are interesting and complex.
And they always have been. Examples abide throughout history and not just Western history. Previous generations may not have had quite the language to describe it, but it's pretty clear they were aware there were lots of people who didn't fit into exact categories. X and Y chromosomes have been known about since 1905. I don't think the Bible was aware of them.
I fucking loathe Rowling. And I am a cis - woman. Who welcomes her trans- woman sisters.
Me too! More of us to fight against the patriarchy, who is the real enemy of us all!
I looked for some shit on this on reddit, and surprisingly the subreddit that was doing the most push back was fucking Rogan.
I would like to see Rowling's victims sue her for all the money her audience gave her when she conned them into thinking she wasn't the lowest kind of Muggle bigot.