Headlines that signal that the story will be misleading and/or stupid

[Admin]

It's complete lack of fear.

I shudder when I think of the things we did as kids. Top of the list was almost certainly the tree walk.

We lived on a large hill, which was only partly developed, so 2/3 of it was natural. In one spot, part of the cliff had fallen away in a horseshoe and a pine tree had fallen across the gap at some later stage.

The trick was walk across the chasm on the tree trunk. It was only 15 or 20 m above the ground. None of us got killed, but I sure as hell wouldn't try it now!

[sparks]

I'm with you on that. I don't care for heights unless I'm inside. If it looks like I can fall, forget it. 66 and never broken a bone. Don't need to start now.

[Meadmaker]

What does science tell us about boxing’s gender row?

(From the BBC)


I haven't read this one. It's conceivable this will be a decent article. So why do I expect that it will be misleading or stupid?


Because the science has been published over and over again, to the extent that it could possibly be. i.e. there is a certain degree of medical privacy involved. However, the science seems to me to be very straightforward. I won't say that Imane Khelif "is a man" or "is a woman", because those statements are more about definitions than science. However, enough information has been leaked that I think we can be fairly confident about what happened here. Imane Khelif is a biological male whose genitals didn't develop normally, giving her the appearance of a female.....except for the muscles.

Should she be allowed to box in the female division? Science can inform that question, but it cannot answer that question. "Should" questions aren't really scientific.

But I've seen other articles where the headline talks about "science", but the body of the article is about anything except science. Off to read.....

And....
It could have been a lot worse. There was a lot of science in it, including a few things I didn't know.

My big beef with this article, and many others like it, some of them much worse than this one, is the pretense that we just can't know anything about what's really going on. Here's a quote:

"Both fighters were said to have failed International Boxing Association gender eligibility tests last year – but there has been conflicting information whether XY chromosomes or elevated testosterone were found."

Ok. Let me clue you in about Imane Khelif. Look at her muscles. She has elevated testosterone. Duh.

Does she also have XY chromosomes? Based on the leaked information, yes.

Does she have testes where you might expect ovaries? We can't be certain, but I'm guessing yes, based on the fact that she rather obviously has high testosterone levels.

Should she be allowed to box as a woman? That's not a scientific question.

[arthwollipot]

Imane Khelif is a biological male whose genitals didn't develop normally, giving her the appearance of a female.....except for the muscles.

There is zero evidence of that. The corrupt and discredited IBF (whose president is a Russian evangelical Christian) claims that they did a test but they have not released either the nature of that test or its results.

Imane Khelif is a woman. Always has been, always will be.

[Meadmaker]

Imane Khelif is a biological male whose genitals didn't develop normally, giving her the appearance of a female.....except for the muscles.

There is zero evidence of that. The corrupt and discredited IBF (whose president is a Russian evangelical Christian) claims that they did a test but they have not released either the nature of that test or its results.

Imane Khelif is a woman. Always has been, always will be.

There is a great deal of evidence. You can ignore it if you wish.

If you want to say that there is no proof* she is a biological male, I would agree. However, there is evidence.

There are certain conditions where biological females develop high levels of testosterone, and Imane Khelif might have one of those conditions.

Is she a woman? Give me a definition, and I'll give you my answer to the question, although that answer might be "insufficient data". (i.e. if you use the definition "adult human female", I will say that I suspect she is not female, but there is insufficient data available to me to be certain.) If you use a social definition of woman, she is absolutely a woman. If you use some other definition? That depends on the definition. The IOC used the definition, "Does the passport say female?" Using that definition, she's a woman.

*No proof available to us. People who have examined her have more information than they have released.

[arthwollipot]

*No proof available to us. People who have examined her have more information than they have released.

The "people who have examined her" are the corrupt and discredited IBF, led by an evangelical Russian Christian, and they have every reason to lie.

By whatever definition you choose - keeping in mind that sex and gender are not binary - she is and always has been a woman.

Are you going to invade her privacy to try and prove otherwise?

[Meadmaker]

*No proof available to us. People who have examined her have more information than they have released.

The "people who have examined her" are the corrupt and discredited IBF, led by an evangelical Russian Christian, and they have every reason to lie.

By whatever definition you choose - keeping in mind that sex and gender are not binary - she is and always has been a woman.

Are you going to invade her privacy to try and prove otherwise?

The people who have examined her include doctors in Algeria, presumably her own physicians and probably some employed by the Algerian Olympic Committee and/or the Algerian affiliate of the IBA. I don't know how many people have ever examined her, but I'm guessing the lab that was hired by the IBA to do the testing for the world championships a couple of years ago (2022? 2023?) was not the first set of people to perform an examination.

That lab, however, was the only one to ever release any data. (Earlier, I said it was leaked. Reading another story today, it wasn't leaked. It was presented.) That lab said that she, and the Taiwanese boxer who was also disqualified from previous competition by the IBA, had an XY Karyotype.

So, the only medical personnel whi have ever eleased test data has said she is XY. The Algerian affiliate of the IBA did not challenge the results, and no other contradictory results have ever been released. I conclude, with confidence but not certainty, that the IBA's lab results were accurate.

So, we have a boxer who is most likely XY, and, based on visible muscle definition clearly does not have Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome.

There is at least one definition of "woman", where such a person does not meet the criteria.



There's also something curious in your reply. You noted that the IBA was led by an evangelical Russian Christian. Presumably his religious views are relevant because evangelical Christians generally hold conservative views on matters of sex and gender. But wait. If we assume, for the sake of argument, that Imane Khelif is a biological female, and presents as a female, and has anatomy that is female, then what conceivable reason related to Christianity would there be for a Christian to lie about her sex? Christians like nice neat packages, where boys are boys and girls are girls. If he had every reason to lie, it must have been for some reason unrelated to his Christian beliefs.

ETA: And would I violate her privacy? I think the people who organize boxing competitions should verify eligibility to compete. In the case of this year's Olympics, the IOC chose simply to view, and share, the data on her passport. However, most athletic organizations have decided that stricter criteria should be used for determining eligibility. Athleses wishing to compete should be required to do whatever the governing body requires of them, and the governing bodies should be allowed to announce the findings of the examinations related to eligibility. As a condition of competition, some voluntary sacrifice of privacy is, and ought to be, required.

[Meadmaker]

“Tests Clearly Show That…”: Imane Khelif’s Testosterone Level Ends Controversial Gender Debate as Team Reveals Doctor’s Findings Days After Winning Olympic Gold


The headline above is an even better example of a stupid headline.

I haven't read the story yet, but I am absolutely certain that, regardless of what the test clearly show, it doesn't end the controversial gender debate, because even if it showed what I suspect, which is that Imane Khelif is XY with high testesterone and even has testes inside, it wouldn't change the fact that she was raised as a girl, because everyone including doctors, parents, and herself thought of her as a girl, and some people would still say she ought to be allowed to compete as a woman.*

If it turned out that she was, in fact, XX, and had ovaries, and had low testesterone, that would put the controversy, in her case, to rest. But tests aren't going to show that.

*ETA: And while I think that such people, like Caster Semenya, shouldn't be allowed to compete as women, I don't think it's a stupid position to support them. I just think it's a bad decision, and even more so in boxing or other contact sports.

But I did read the article. She has naturally high testosterone, but has been taking hormones and has lowered that level. Within the article, there are some conflicting statements regarding whether or not she's XY. I don't think the gender debate is ended.

[Admin]

Are you going to invade her privacy to try and prove otherwise?

We invade athletes' privacy every day. They are required to expose their genitals and urinate in front of an official and I don't see a pin-prick blood test as a major problem.

Caster Semenya is intersex, but genetically male and not allowed to compete against women. Her privacy was violated and they don't even hit each other in 800m races. Well, not since Mary Decker retired anyway.

In boxing, you're talking about an advantage that could easily be a lethal advantage, and if someone's privacy is invaded to stop that, I'm good.

Better a few tears than a dead chick is my motto.

We check boxers' gloves to make sure they aren't weighted, let's check their chromosomes to make sure they're not blokes.

And if she's so concerned about privacy being invaded, take up chess or tiddlywinks. Boxing has rules for a reason.

[arthwollipot]

If she has such an advantage, why did she lose so many times against other female boxers?