Controversy, Complexity and Compassion

The Olympics boxing row (continued)

I have next to no interest in sport, and I find it barbaric that people would enjoy seeing boxers punch the hell out of each other for entertainment. Nevertheless, the Olympic women’s boxing controversy raises questions far beyond one sporting event, for it goes to the heart of many bitter ideological conflicts raging around questions of sex, gender, and identity.

Gender and sexual difference form the focus of most of my academic research and publications. Having spent my first thirty three years in Africa (Zambia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe), I have a passion for the dignity and rights of women and children, especially those who are poor, marginalised, subjugated and exploited. The questions raised by the Olympic controversy impact upon the most intimate aspects of our lives, with vast ethical and social ramifications. So we all have skin in this.

I’ve already written one Substack post reflecting on the challenges posed by Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting’s participation in the women’s boxing competition. Both have now won gold medals. The controversy shows no sign of dying down, and more information and speculation are produced every day. While much of it has generated more heat than light, it has also brought into public debate scientific research and theories about the relationship between chromosomal combinations, sexual biology and gendered identities. I’ve been following all this closely because it is a subject of fundamental interest to me, and I’ve decided to share more of my reflections and questions.

Here is a link to my previous post:

---

Here are my new reflections:

The fact that both boxers failed previous sex tests and were disqualified from competing in the Olympics as women suggests that they have a DSD (difference in sex development). This can mean that a seemingly female body is discovered to have a male chromosomal combination (XY), rather than the normal XX female combination. Often the condition is not discovered until puberty or even later in life when problems emerge with fertility and sexual intercourse. The simple cheek swab used in sex testing reveals whether an athlete is XY or XX.

DSDs are relatively rare, estimated to affect about one in 5,000 to 6,000 of the general population, though there is some evidence that they are more common in parts of Africa. I find this interesting, because having taught courses on gender and theology to students from the African diaspora living in London as well as online to students living in Africa, I found them highly receptive to and interested in the study of DSDs or, as we called it then, “intersex”. Some had direct experience of people with these conditions. This contrasted with strong expressions of homophobia and resistance to trans identities. The lectures were lively and the banter was good-humoured as “Ma Prof” tried to persuade them that racism would have given rise to similar reactions in a British lecture room not so long ago, if issues of racial inclusivity, dignity and respect were being discussed.

The question of the significance of DSDs for women’s sports became a topic of intense debate when South African athlete Caster Semenya was diagnosed with a DSD known as 5-ARD, a condition that often leads to infants being identified as female at birth on account of under-developed or internalised male sex organs, but they then go through male puberty which results in testosterone levels higher than those found in women. Even when testosterone levels are medically reduced, this may not significantly reduce muscle mass and bone density which develop during male puberty. People with 5-ARD are over-represented in women’s sports.

Even among scientists, there are disagreements about the extent to which biological sex is determined by XX (female) or XY (male) chromosomes. The few examples of responsible reporting have acknowledged how many challenges the Olympics controversy has posed to sporting categories, and indeed to our whole understanding of how sexual difference affects our human characteristics and capabilities. Many new facts and theories are likely to emerge as research continues into the vastly complex and diverse phenomenon of DSDs, so anything we say at this stage must to some extent be provisional and subject to change.

Yet some facts are undeniable. There are different sporting categories for men and women because in some sports in which strength is a factor, biology gives males a significant advantage over females. When we combine that with a sport that involves physically beating up one’s opponent, we should be profoundly disturbed at the possibility of men hitting women for sport.

Boxing is a brutal sport, but given that women do engage in competitive boxing, and given that male bodies are naturally stronger and more powerful than female bodies, sex tests can help to establish whether or not bodies that possess unusual strength and muscular development have high testosterone levels associated with male puberty. If XY chromosomes and/or high levels of testosterone are present and an athlete wants to challenge the initial findings, further tests can be carried out.

Women athletes are generally in favour of sex testing involving a cheek swab. Writing in The Times, Janice Turner observes that:

at the 1996 Atlanta Games an IOC questionnaire asked female athletes if the cheek swab should continue (82 per cent said yes) and whether it made them “anxious” (94 per cent said no). Nonetheless the IOC ignored almost 1,000 elite women who replied and abolished cheek swabs for Sydney in 2000.

A more recent large-scale research project suggests that most elite women athletes favour biological sex categorisation in sport, though the level of support varies according to which sport they’re referring to. They are also strongly in favour of more inclusivity for transgender athletes, but with limits on eligibility to participate in women’s sporting events.

Conflict and Compassion

I’m reluctant to rehash the whole sorry saga of the Olympics, but I’m astounded by how vehement so-called “liberals” have been in celebrating the victories of two possibly biological males over their indubitably female competitors, without even a glimmer of consideration for those women who saw all their training and dedication wasted.

Those who have taken up dogmatic positions on either side of this complex debate have made no attempt to show compassion to the victims on the other side—for in some sense all the competitors have become victims in this controversy. It has also exposed the closed-minded absolutism of many gender ideologues, who will latch onto every opportunity to condemn those who stand unambiguously for women’s rights when these are sidelined by emerging debates and demands relating to sexuality, gender and identity. As Helen Lewis observes in an excellent article in The Atlantic:

[O]ne can argue that the benefits of male puberty are overstated: The sports scientist Joanna Harper, who is herself a runner and a trans woman, has queried just how big an advantage biologically male athletes who suppress their testosterone really have. That’s a question that can be investigated and answered empirically. But too many people who have sprung to Khelif’s and Lin’s defense have assumed that bigotry is the only possible motivation for their opponents. “Challenge: find a single person whining about trans people in women’s sports who has done or said anything supportive of women’s sports previously,” David Roberts, a popular science influencer, posted on X. Okay then, challenge accepted: the tennis legend Martina Navratilova. The boxing champion Nicola Adams. The former swimmer Sharron Davies. Shall I go on?

This Facebook post is an excellent example of what Lewis is describing:

This defiant celebration of a defeated woman embracing her opponent worries me, for it suggests a refusal even to acknowledge that this is not a simple matter of honest victory and gracious defeat. Angela Carini withdrew from her fight with Khelif in tears after less than a minute, saying “I have never been hit so hard in my life.” She has subsequently apologised and said she feels sorry about the controversy and regrets not shaking Khelif’s hand because she was angry: “my games had already gone up in smoke.” A growing number of women athletes are expressing concern, including the adoption of a gesture in the shape of an X that is gaining traction as a sign of protest. When women refuse to submit, comply, smile, and admit defeat (the kind of behaviour expected from “good” women), they are silenced or condemned by self-righteous liberals.

Turkey’s Esra Yildiz Kahraman copies Bulgarian boxer Svetlana Kamenova’s gesture after both were defeated by Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting

It’s important to keep repeating that this controversy has nothing to do with trans rights. As I point out in my previous post:

Filipino boxer Hergie Bacyadan is a trans man competing in the Olympics women’s section. He makes clear he has not taken hormones or transitioned surgically, so there’s no case to answer. There are reports that Bacyadan has said that people with XY chromosomes should not be allowed to compete in women’s Olympic sports, which surely calls for caution about branding people transphobic for expressing such views.

Neither is this about race. The glorious triumphs of Black athletes in many Olympic sports attest to the fact that the celebration of sporting excellence is a rare example of when race ceases to be a dividing issue with regard to participation and inclusion.

Controversy and Misogyny?

It’s hard not to see some of this as latent misogyny, even among women who declare themselves feminists. I’m surprised by how many feminists are willing to accept any theory about males with DSDs really being women in order to keep in with the in-crowd on gender activism, even when it violates fundamental feminist principles. In the end, the benefit of the doubt was given to two boxers who at no time offered to settle the question by making public the results of their sex tests. To quote Lewis again:

Both sides have demonstrated a lack of interest in women’s sports, and the well-being of all its competitors, that is tantamount to contempt. A simple cheek swab could clear this up, revealing the presence (or not) of a second X chromosome. If either athlete was XY instead, she could have further genetic testing to get a precise diagnosis and determine if it affected her ability to participate fairly. If Lin and Khelif are straightforwardly female athletes with XX chromosomes, they could have appealed their IBA bans to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, an independent body based in Switzerland. (Lin did not do so, according to the IBA, while Khelif withdrew her appeal. The process can be costly for athletes.)

Khelif’s trainer Georges Cazorla has confirmed in an interview with French journal Le Point that Khelif was devastated to discover that “she could not be a girl”:

Indépendamment des résultats de ces tests biologiques et, sans entrer dans leurs détails – c'est une affaire de biologistes et de médecins, cette pauvre jeune fille a été catastrophée, anéantie de découvrir d'un seul coup qu'elle pourrait ne pas être une fille !

Independently of the results and these biological tests, and without going into details—it’s a matter for biologists and doctors, this poor young girl was traumatised, devastated to suddenly discover that she could not be a girl!

According to Cazorla, Khelif has been on testosterone suppressants, which suggests that her testosterone levels were found to be consistent with those produced during male puberty. In spite of these revelations, Cazorla insists that Khelif has a “girl’s sensitivity” and must be regarded as a woman:

Après les championnats du monde 2023, où elle a été disqualifiée, j'ai pris les devants en contactant un endocrinologue de renom du CHU parisien, Kremlin-Bicêtre, qui l'a examinée. Celui-ci a confirmé qu'Imane est bien une femme, malgré son caryotype et son taux de testostérone. Il a dit : « Il y a un problème avec ses hormones, avec ses chromosomes, mais c'est une femme. » C'est tout ce qui nous importait. Nous avons ensuite travaillé avec une médecin basée en Algérie pour contrôler et réguler le taux de testostérone d'Imane, qui est actuellement dans la norme féminine. Des tests montrent très bien que toutes ses qualités musculaires et autres s'amoindrissent depuis. Actuellement, elle peut être comparée au niveau musculaire et au niveau biologique à une femme-femme-femme.

After the 2023 world championships, where she was disqualified, I took the initiative by contacting a renowned endocrinologist at the Paris CHU, Kremlin-Bicêtre, who examined her. The doctor confirmed that Imane is a woman, despite her karyotype and testosterone levels. He said, “There’s a problem with her hormones, with her chromosomes, but she is a woman.” That’s all we cared about. We then worked with a doctor based in Algeria to monitor and regulate Imane’s testosterone level, which is currently in the female norm. Tests show very well that all her muscular and other qualities have diminished since then. Currently, she can be compared at the muscular level and at the biological level to a woman-woman-woman.

If Cazorla is correct about testosterone suppressants, there can be no way of knowing if that brought levels down sufficiently to allow Khelif to compete in the women’s category, because such information was not sought by the IOC. Meanwhile, women boxers who have in the past fought against Khelif have come out on both sides of the debate. Bulgarian Nigerian Joana Nwamerue insists that Khelif is a man. When she expressed doubts during a sparring match, she was told that Khelif was a woman who had been “biologically altered by living in the mountains”. Former Olympian boxer and Olympic boxing coach Rafael Lozano has spoken in an interview with a Spanish radio station of how, during a training retreat in Madrid ahead of the Olympics, Khelif was deemed too dangerous to fight against women after some were injured. On the other hand, some women boxers have spoken out in defence of Khelif, including Irish boxer Amy Broadhurst who beat Khelif in the 2022 World Championships.

Culture and Gender

I call Khelif “she” because culture, upbringing and early socialisation influence our sense of self, even if there is considerable evidence that our gendered identities are shaped if not determined by biological sexual characteristics and capacities. Much has been written about Khelif’s culture, and it does indeed seem likely that the discovery of her male chromosomal combination would have been a traumatising event for somebody brought up to believe she was female. On the other hand, it’s interesting that she had to overcome huge social obstacles as a child to be permitted to participate in traditionally male sports (football and boxing), that were forbidden to girls in her culture. Eyebrows have also been raised by a photograph showing Khelif sitting on the shoulders of her male trainer, her legs straddling his neck. If, as we are asked to believe, Algerian culture has very clear rules for sexual propriety and behaviour, this is an improbable way to celebrate a woman’s sporting victory!

Still, I don’t want to under-estimate the struggles faced by Khelif, nor to deny the trauma caused by discovering that she was chromosomally male, if what her trainer says is true. I’d rather consider the larger issues than make this one individual the focus, but the fact remains that there are unresolved questions about how far this situation constitutes a violation of justice for female boxers. Olympic gold medallists must expect to be in the news, and if they have knowingly hidden behind secrecy, denial and deception about their sex tests, they should be prepared for controversy. To quote Lewis again:

Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting have been through hell over the past week, and the determination and discipline they have shown are admirable. But if the questions around their eligibility remain unresolved, the medals they win will always have an asterisk next to them. That isn’t fair to them, or to their opponents.

An Inconclusive Conclusion

The more we know, the less we understand. Eventually, it may be that additional sporting categories will have to be created to accommodate athletes with conditions that elude clear categorisation on the basis of sex. But in the meantime, it cannot be right that women are expected to yield every time such controversies arise. Former Olympic rowing gold medallist and sports commentator Matthew Pinsent was one of the few reporters to tell it as it is when, in a scathing criticism of the IOC, he told BBC Sports: “It’s exploded on them, it’s been really unfortunate. They can’t have both equity and inclusion. … It’s so weird that they allowed it to happen.”

In the meantime, Khelif has named J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk in a lawsuit she has filed in Paris, alleging “aggravated cyber-harassment”. So this issue is unlikely to die down any time soon, but one way or the other the lawsuit will mean greater transparency and honesty about Khelif’s condition and its impact on her boxing abilities.

None of this is conclusive. I admit that the more I research and reflect, the more aware I become of how important, confusing and complex these questions are. There is no room for ideological absolutes, and the fact that gender ideologies now infect both ends of the political spectrum, from the Vatican to postmodern theorists, should be a cause for concern to anybody who values informed, ethically responsible and intellectually accountable philosophical debate over issues of vital importance for social justice and human wellbeing.