Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

Many forms of contraception also stop the "time of the month" depending on the woman in question and there are other issues that can cause women not to have periods so if you are taking that as an "unfair advantage" then I suspect a large number of women could get banned.

IOC aren't a governing body. The governing body was banned foe being corrupt.
Which governing body are doing cheek swaps?
My understanding was that they no longer happened. As current criteria was based on testosterone levels not chromosomes. I'd have no issues with cheek swaps. But I do understand the logic behind testosterone being the marker.

(on that note, have you managed to grasp why the transperson was refering to their test levels as being that of a child - I was a bit surprised that was confusing)

I made it up? You realise we can see you previous post?

In your last post you said whatever they are assigned at birth should be what they box as, right?
So you should have no issue with this boxer, who was assigned female at birth. Photo as a child.

This has been my stance and will remain my stance in no shape or form should trans or any other version of it be allowed to box against ordinary women, its too dangerous and unfair to boot end of story.

I don't think transwomen should be boxing in women's divisions either, for obvious reasons. But Khelif isn't trans, any versions of trans. you're proving my point out twitter-esque outrage based on zero information.

Well if they cant figure out whether she is a man or a woman she should not be cleared to box, least of all vs women if there is doubt.

When I said the details are not know. I'm referring to not known to you or I or the internet at large. So there's a lot of baseless claims knocking about. Misleading people into thinking she is trans (as above). I'm sure the IOC know much more than the internet at large.

They are the de facto governing body for boxing because they removed the IBA's accreditation and have not put another body in place yet. That's the source of this problem: they decided some back to leave these decisions to the governing bodies, but are now complaining that they disagree with how the IBA did it. They can't really have it both ways.

No governing bodies are doing cheek swabs. Their regulations require that the national organisations provide suitable evidence of qualification. Here for instance are relevant extracts from the World Aquatics (FINA) document:

F. THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITION AND FOR SETTING FINA RECORDS IN THE MEN’S AND WOMEN’S CATEGORIES

2. Certification

a. All athletes must certify their chromosomal sex with their Member Federation in order to be eligible for FINA competitions. Failure to do so, or provision of a false certification, will render the athlete ineligible.
b. Member Federations must confirm their athletes’ certifications ofchromosomal sex when registering their athletes to compete in FINA competitions.
c. FINA reserves the right to include a chromosomal sex screen in its antidoping protocol to confirm such certification.

3. Eligibility for the Men’s Category

a. All male athletes, including athletes with 46 XY DSD, are eligible to compete in FINA competitions and to set FINA World Records in the men’s category, regardless of their legal gender, gender identity, or gender expression.

4. Eligibility for the Women’s Category

a. All female athletes are eligible to compete in FINA competitions and setFINA World Records in the women’s category, regardless of their legal gender, gender identity, or gender expression, under the following conditions:
i. Athletes who have previously used testosterone as part of female-to-male gender-affirming hormone treatment (with or without a TUE) but are no longer following that treatment are eligible to compete in the women’s category in FINA competitions and to set FINA World Records in the women’s category in FINA competitions and in other events recognised by FINA if they can establish to FINA’s comfortable satisfaction that (a) the testosterone use was for less than a year in total (i.e., from the date of first use to the date of last use) and did not take place during pubertal growth and development, and (b) their testosterone levels in serum (or plasma) are back to pre-treatment normal and any associated anabolic effects have been eliminated.

Certifying chromosomal sex is done by means of a cheek swab. In the event of doubt, FINA reserves the right to retest. But AFAIUI, that means that an independent lab does the test, not FINA officials. Which is also what happened with the IBA - it was done by an independent lab.

https://resources.fina.org/fina/document/2022/06/19/525de003-51f4-47d3-8d5a-716dac5f77c7/FINA-INCLUSION-POLICY-AND-APPENDICES-FINAL-.pdf

I don't believe the decision to remove IBA has anything to do with how they were doing the gender eligibility. It was predominately the rampant corruption and bribing of judges.

The IBA and the IOC are at loggerheads now. I don't think we can trust what either says about each other.

FINA's new policy seems pretty good. Certainly better than previous one.

If the IBA test was certified by an independent lab, I think we could accept it as face value. The issue is that we don't know that. We don't even know what test or criteria they used. The claim is the the test was return overnight, too quickly for a valid test - but is that claim even accurate. If there were concerns, there were 12 months to do another one.
Obvious, the IOC have biological passport info. As I said above, there shouldn't be any doubt or grey area.

And I didn't suggest it had anything to do with their removal. I've seen no suggestions that it did.

I'm saying - multiple times now, so it's strange that you still don't seem able to respond to it - that a passport/birth cert check is not a good proof of sex, for a number of reasons, and that most female athletes wanted the relatively non intrusive cheek swab screening test to be kept as the main evidence required, so that it doesn't matter whether the IBA's reasons for testing were suspect or not, the fact is that the IOC created this problem by their poor procedures allowing there to be a doubt in the first place.

https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/the-dystopian-history-of-sex-testing

The above gives history of the IOC with regards sex testing, eye opening to say the least.

It feels like this issue could be cleared up quite easily.

A test could have been retaken as soon as this issue became controversial. If these women are infact XX and the entire issue would be put to bed immediately.

The IBA cannot release results of tests taken previously by athletes because of the medical release forms signed that do not allow the results to be made public. The athletes at the centre of the controvery could however ask for the results to be released now and that would clarify things - but they haven't.

They could have appealed their exclusion from IBA competition on the basis of these test results but they chose not to. Kaleif initially did but stopped proceedings before they were adjudicated on.

If there if a DSD condition given their age, they are likely aware of what it is. DSD conditions in people born as XY are seperated into two categories, those who undergo male puberty and those who do not, often due to complete androgen receptor insensitivity. If they have not undergone a male puberty then again the issue is clarified and there is a strong case for them fighting in a women's category.

If they have a condition on DSD spectrum that has seen them undergo a male puberty that means they should not fight women as there will be a strength disparity.

It's understandable that these women wish to keep these issues private, but it is difficult to understand how the IOC did not forsee the problems that would arrise given the IBA test issues were in the public arena. They have failed in their duty of care to protect the privacy and dignity of the athletes in the competition and failed to preserve the integrity of the awards they offer.

Why is there no concrete effort to bring clarity here? Why has the wild red herring of the Russian's trying to interfere in the Olympics and target France's reputation been thrown into the mix? Who's ends does it serve? Certainly not fairness to anyone involved or the furtherment of women's sport. The questions this has thrown up feels more telling than the answers on offer so far. I will be cynical and say it looks to me like an attempt to allow participants with an XY chromosome who have undergone a male puberty compete in women's sport. It creates a precedent that justifies future participation of all those born XY and who have undergone a male puberty in any women's sport. If it flies in a contact sport like boxing it should fly in any.

My god.

I still cannot see how 'strength' would make an amateur boxer any better, assuming that they are already strong and working out in the gym every day. Amateur boxing is mostly about skill, speed, feinting, good footwork, excellent reaction times, clever defence and so on.

Tell me you know nothing about boxing or contact sports without telling me you don't know. Have you heard of weight classes before?

The idea that a biological male would have some sort of massive inbuilt advantage over a female amateur boxer and even pose a physical threat to their health and safety is clearly nonsensical. Khelif has lost a load of amateur bouts, including to Kellie Harrington and Amy Broadhurst.

I can't understand how anyone of a basic intelligence would say or even believe something like this. It is either that or you have a complete lack of knowledge of basic human biology.

The IOC has a history of allowing biological males into female competition, they do not want gender testing as even when they used it and found a number of athletes in women's categories had male genes they still allowed them to compete.

In 1996, seeking greater accuracy, the IOC adopted gene testing for the Atlanta Olympics. Blood samples from 3,387 female athletes were analyzed for the SRYgene located on the Y (male) chromosome, which in mammals (e.g. humans) triggers an embryo to develop into a male. Females, lacking a Y chromosome, do not have an SRY gene. This process was far more complex and costly than the cheek swab, involving significant time and resources. Indeed, it took 58 professionals donating 18-90 days of their time to do the testing, with laboratory costs exceeding $150,000.

Despite identifying eight athletes with male genetics (1 in 423 female athletes), the IOC gave them permits to compete anyway. While it remains baffling that the IOC officials let these eight individuals with male genetics compete, the process showed that the genetic screen did work.

How is this relevant to these two athletes, who are not, as far as anyone knows, transgender?

To put the above in visual context. These 3 Athletes won the Olympic womens 800m medals:

while these 3 finished 4th 5th and 6th

The top 3 were subsequently effectively banned from competing in women's events but kept the medals while none of the bottom 3 would ever win an Olympic medal.

Khelif into the 66kg Final with a powerful display. 1 step away from gold. Hasn't lost a round.

Have you confused with with somebody else? Where have I “not been able to respond” to a cheek swap. I’ve literally said it was a good approach on more than one post about it.

The issue with IBAs test is not their reasons. Target testing is ok. The issue is the lack of info.

You’ve said it was a chromosome cheek swab. That it was a I dependent lab. Can you point to anywhere that says that? Or the result? Because the IOC dispute that. Which is the issue. Nothing is certified. Both sides are lying somewhere.

who is that you are talking about? The first one at the centre of the controversy won through to the 66kg final tonight 5-0 with a knockdown,and the second is fighting in the 57kg semi final tomorrow.