Some controversy with the Algerian boxer. Hate that it?s already become politicized with right wingers purposely framing it as a transgender issue where it appears that it?s one of those things where the athlete is born with female body parts but also testes with high level of testosterone. I honestly not sure what the right approach is but it?s a lot more complex than the framing of a guy fighting girls.
Like mostly every issue, its more complicated than the talking heads want you to think it is. At least the same right wingers aren't targeting trans kids (hopefully). Imane Khelif is 25, so the criticisms are at least a little less vile.
Not to say that she shouldn?t be competing. I do think the high levels of testosterone does give her a competitive advantage but what is the solution? Maybe testosterone blockers? Estrogen? That may also mess up with her body. I really don?t know what the answer but and I completely understand the concern of her opponents.
However, it bothers me when people are either being knowingly stupid or ignorantly stupid when people try to explain the situation and they are being stubborn about it.
I guess my point is that its a complicated situation and people come up with simplified solutions. Maybe its human nature to make things easier to understand. Either way, its a wedge issue that does more to divide people than unite, which is the entire purpose of the Olympics.
I think there probably *is* a simplified answer, though: if somebody has XY chromosomes -- particularly in combination with heightened testosterone -- they shouldn't be allowed to compete as a woman.
Why is that not the proper answer? Politics shouldn't play a role, but fairness of the playing field should, I think.
Nothing to do with politics. Then you?d be excluding an athlete purely based on their biological makeup. If that gives an unfair advantage, then would we have to exclude Michael Phelps based on his biological makeup?
https://www.biography.com/athletes/michael-phelp-perfect-body-swimming#
I just don?t think it?s as simple.
The world isn't perfectly fair. Excluding people with XY chromosomes and increased testosterone in reasonable. It's a non-arbitrary standard that keeps the playing field level, while potentially excluding about .018% of the population overall (very, very few of whom would ever be Olympic athletes).
1/500,000 of all people make the Olympics. 1.8/10000 are intersex. So, odds are 1.8/5,000,000,000. That's pretty close to perfect fairness.
I think your logic is flawed. A female with an XY chromosome and more testosterone is a better athlete. People who are better athletes are more likely to be Olympians. So the pool of Olympians is likely to have a higher incidence rate of these people over the pool everybody.
Edited my bad math. Two independent events.
You're correct that intersex people who have XY chromosomes and increased testosterone are likely to be better athletes than a non-intersex woman. That's the point, though.
The solution is either allow all female's testosterone supplements (which is a bad idea for a number of reasons) or to artificially lower the testosterone of the intersex athlete. Even then, they will have significant advantages over most non-intersex women.
Think of the extreme example of somebody like Hulk Hogan or Arnold Schwarzenegger. These guys did steroids for years. If they then go clean for a year or two, they still have a ton of muscle mass that otherwise would have been impossible.
Ok, so we are in agreement that intersex athletes are more athletic. It then follows that more athletic people will have a shot at the Olympics. Therefore your logic of eliminating the intersex athlete from competition is ?pretty close to perfect fairness? bc there are so few (according to your probability calculations) is poor reasoning. That?s all I?m disputing, your argument of fair discrimination bc of low incidence rate.
Imma go back to your probability math real quick. For the probability of two random events happening at the same time you multiply the probabilities. As you did in your example. But this isn?t two independent events, you are picking one person. It?s one event w two criteria. In a pool of 100,000 ppl the likelihood of an intersex person is 1.8. So in a pool of 500,000 ppl the likelihood of an intersex person is 9 (1.8 x 5). Therefore when picking an Olympic athlete out of a pool of 500,000 the likelihood that person is intersex is 9/500,000.
