sudneo

I didn't mention testosterone at all. I am not a specialist and I mostly don't care about the details. I specifically talked in functional terms: if whatever condition gives you some advantages that men have, then it breaks the categories that are established. In this way, that condition would be different from -say- having huge feet like Phelps, even if they give you an advantage, because there are no categories based on foot size in swimming.

Everything else is an interesting hypothetical discussion, and maybe one day categories will be based on more parameters. Fact is, today they are like this, rough and using proxies such as gender and weight to make fights that are more-or-less fair.

How did she add validity? She simply quit a match and said it was due to pain. People picked it up and made a case on top of, which is not her responsibility. Once that happened, she apologized for it.

You didn't provide any source about what you are claming. I have seen the interview recording. She has never said anything at all about the other boxer.

Here is the interview (use a VPN to Italy and translate)

So to answer the question: you are fomenting hate against the Italian boxer with false accusations (at the best of our knowledge):

• she didn't start any allegation about Imane
• she did not make any remark, let alone any teansfobic remark

You are effectively the equivalent of people who jumped the gun and started calling Imane a man.

Usually when you confidently write wrong information is good practice to rectify with an edit.

The athlete mentioned here is a British diver.

England is a Wester country, I presume, so I guess your assumption is at least partially wrong: even in the west some athletes might not be making ends meet.

So you are confidently answering people with wrong information, pushing hate against an individual, and your reaction to someone who educated you on the matter is just "thank you"? Maybe don't spread misinformation if you are not certain, and edit your factually wrong comments...

"Europeans", a notoriously homogeneous class of people, with a sample of size of 1.

Looking at the other comments, you are clearly not here to discuss, but I will make a good faith attempt and play devil's advocate.

The difference between intersex and other conditions you mentioned is that it blurs the lines of a specific set of parameters that are specifically used to create categories between sports. Men and women are not fighting each other for more than anagraphic reasons (I hope we can all agree on this), and if a condition invalidates that distinction (I.e. gives some advantages that men have over a women), then it breaks the boundary of such categories in a similar way as it would be having someone from a heavier category fight in a lighter one (BTW, this is routinely done by having athletes go in terrible dehydration regimes).

Now this has nothing to do with this specific case, as there is no any objective proof for any of this, nor that she is intersex nor that she does have any advantage, but it's purely a way to frame the answer to the question "what's the difference between having scoliosis and being intersex".

Edit:

I will add one more thing, comparing a sprinter to a long-distance swimmer is exactly like comparing someone who runs 100m with those who run marathons. Clearly there is an advantage, considering that Katie Ledecky is an absolute monster, but she would have beaten the 3 worse times only that men did in this Olympics, and that she would have been almost a minute behind the winner, meaning almost 2 full lengths. Of course men have an advantage...also if you took the time from https://www.worldaquatics.com/athletes/1001621/michael-phelps, you probably have seen that he was 15 at the time...

She didn't start any allegation. You are spreading miainformation.

The quote you cited is from days after, and she apologized for the case that was created, but she didn't start any of it. Her interview after the match was 10 seconds...

She didn't start any allegation. You are spreading miainformation.

The quote you cited is from days after, and she apologized for the case that was created, but she didn't start any of it. Her interview after the match was 10 seconds...

Surrendering is part of the rules, why are you blowing on hate, exactly?

She didn't suggest anything was incorrect. She literally said that she is nobody to judge the match and that she gave up due to pain.

This is honestly an argument that I find very weak. I mean absolutely there are plenty of genetic advantages in general in sport. The problem is that not all sports have categories to isolate competitions for certain parameters. Swimming does not, so you could argue that is unfair by default, but that's what it is right now. Fighting sports generally do have categories, both gender and weight.

If we leave alone gender, if someone had some condition (let's imagine something that doesn't exist) that would result in having muscle mass common for a 80Kg, but in a 70Kg body, that person would probably have an unfair advantage in the 70Kg category because weight is a proxy for muscle mass as well.

The only reasonable argument here is that the boxer, even if she has some genetic condition, still tested within the limits for female boxers. That is pretty much it, which means that whatever condition she has (if any), it's not considered an advantage in the female category according to current standards.