• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    wrongly questioned

    Were the allegations actually disproven? What I’ve read is that the IOC chose not to investigate.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      1, trans women are actually at a competitive disadvantage since hormone blockers also nullify the low levels of Testosterone that women produce naturally.

      2, of all the fucking countries to suspect of “cheating” by fielding a trans woman, ALGERIA‽

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The claim is not that she is taking hormone blockers, and not that whatever condition she may have is known to the Algerian government or even to herself.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is not really a need to. The allegation comes from the IBA which is unrecognized by the Olympics and is a Russian propaganda organization. A Russian boxer lost to her and an official who is now fired for corruption disqualified her. Her birth certificate and passport say female and her testosterone is within the range for women. You can’t just give extra screening to women you don’t find attractive.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          You mean another organization that tested her but never told us specifically what the test was, who administered it, who analyzed it and what the results were?

          • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            yeah. what was i thinking. they all must be wrong, you must be right. may the testosterone fuel imane end the sport for good for all women.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The article says the IOC honored what was on her passport. I don’t think there was any valid concern raised, it was just the Russian body doing Russian things.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Yes, they chose not to investigate. I suppose one might call the allegations unfounded, but without evidence to the contrary they can’t reasonably be called false.

        • Corvid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          There’s a teacup orbiting the sun between Mars and Jupiter. There’s no evidence to the contrary, so it can’t reasonably be called false.

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary. Teacups are man-made objects, rocket launches are closely monitored, and no rocket is known to have launched a teapot into that orbit. It isn’t absolutely impossible that something very much like a teapot formed there spontaneously, that a teapot was secretly launched there for no apparent reason, or that extraterrestrials placed a teapot there, but again there is evidence that these events are very unlikely to have happened. Russell’s goal was to illustrate that the burden of proof should be on the one making unfalsifiable claims, but he didn’t pick a good example - the lack of a plausible mechanism for the teapot to arrive in that orbit was even stronger evidence before spaceflight.

                  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    From your Wikipedia article itself:

                    Another philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, states that a falsehood lies at the heart of Russell’s argument. Russell’s argument assumes that there is no evidence against the teapot, but Plantinga disagrees:

                    Clearly we have a great deal of evidence against teapotism. For example, as far as we know, the only way a teapot could have gotten into orbit around the sun would be if some country with sufficiently developed space-shot capabilities had shot this pot into orbit. No country with such capabilities is sufficiently frivolous to waste its resources by trying to send a teapot into orbit. Furthermore, if some country had done so, it would have been all over the news; we would certainly have heard about it. But we haven’t. And so on. There is plenty of evidence against teapotism.

    • Godort@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes. She’s female and was born female.

      It’s illegal to be transgender in Algeria, and the only complaint came from a Russian boxing body with a history of making suspect claims in the past.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The claim is not that she was initially considered to be a man by the Algerian government and then changed her public identity to that of a woman, but rather that she has some sort of intersex condition that elevates her testosterone levels into the masculine range.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          She is a woman who was born a woman and happens to have high testosterone for a woman, just like some people are taller than others. She just happens to be at one end of the testosterone spectrum.

          Just because you want baseless rumors to be true doesn’t make them true.

          • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            What’s interesting is Katie Ledecky can beat him on long distance swims, if we go by their times. So how much of an advantage is gender in many sports at this level? And let’s look at disability - Usain Bolt had/has scoliosis, Ledecky has POTS, and many other athletes have “disabling” conditions. So why would intersex get a special category that isn’t allowed? It’s just transphobia.

            Here’s a source for Katie Ledecky beating Phelps: https://www.essentiallysports.com/us-sports-news-olympics-news-swimming-news-is-katie-ledecky-faster-than-michael-phelps-answering-the-burning-question-of-the-swimming-community-before-us-olympic-trials/

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              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…

              • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                The thing is, other hormones can give advantages too. That people put so much stock into testosterone alone is bad science. That intersex conditions that involve testosterone are so hated is transphobia. Women should be in their neat little boxes and men in theirs and any anatomy that changes that is taboo and should be banned. Like where should an intersex fighter compete? If this woman was intersex and had LOCAH or PCOS or other conditions, should she not be allowed in any division of Olympics?

                Why don’t we have testosterone classes instead of (or in addition to) weight classes, if it matters so much? All athletes with the same level of testosterone can compete, just like athletes that weigh the same compete against each other. Why dont we organize it that way instead? Isn’t that more exact and fair?

                • sudneo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  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.

                  • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 month ago

                    Well, everyone else here is specifically talking about testosterone. That’s the “problematic” chemical. It’s relevant because it’s a normal endogenous chemical we make and some women naturally make more. It can help with more muscle mass and bone density. That it’s testosterone is entirely relevant.

                    That’s like speaking on Gaza and saying “it doesn’t matter where it is.” Like yes it absolutely matters. The context and specifics matter when discussing complicated topics.

                    All athletes that beat other athletes have a presumed physical advantage. A physical advantage isn’t an issue. It’s testosterone that’s the issue according to the people bitching about it.

          • Ech@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Seriously. Phelps is pretty much genetically ideal for a swimmer, but nobody claimed it was “UnfAiR!!” when he swept the board multiple olympics in a row, garnering more gold medals than anyone in history, before or since.

            One female boxer looks a bit “too” muscular and the bigots are up in arms. Fucking assholes.

        • realitista@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          There seems to be little credible hard evidence on either side, so anyone claiming to know the real truth here is just talking out of their ass.

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            That’s the point I was originally trying to make. This article is written as if the question has been conclusively answered, but it hasn’t been.