Two female boxers at the Paris Olympics have found themselves embroiled in a row over gender inclusion.
Both were born female and have always identified as female.
Physical differences between competitors are abundant in sport.
Bonnie Jansen is a multimedia journalist in the NZME sports team. She’s a football commentator and co-host of the Football Fever podcast and was part of the Te Rito cadetship scheme before becoming a fulltime journalist.
OPINION
In sport, there are advantages and disparities for all athletes – and this is something spectators bask in. We adore competitors with super genes: Such as Lisa Carrington, Simone Biles and Katie Ledecky as they stride ahead of their competitors.
There’s a reason it is thrilling to watch the muscly Serena Williams strike the ball; the petite, rapid Lionel Messi dribble around opponents and Michael Phelps glide through the water with his incredible wingspan.
Sam Whitelock and Brodie Retallick will forever be remembered for incredible careers; both had near-perfect genetic builds for their roles as rugby locks. Boxer Tyson Fury is bigger and taller than most of his opponents.
Niche body types may have helped set these athletes apart – and that’s something genuine sports fans respect, rather than criticise.
Opponents of the exceptional species generally don’t make excuses either. Kiwi middle-distance runner Samuel Tanner didn’t blame his blunder at Paris for being notably shorter than other runners. Roger Federer never complained that Rafael Nadal had a Grand Slam edge because he was a left-handed player.
So, why is it when there’s a female boxer, born with a slight difference, who has physical attributes out of her control (similar to the aforementioned athletes), that she is called out for being too dominant or dangerous in her field?
Algeria’s Imane Khelif, boxing in the 66kg category at Paris, is at the centre of a gender-eligibility row. After Italian boxer Angela Carini abandoned their Olympic fight after 46 seconds, the Algerian has been under suspicion for being too masculine.
It came after Khelif was disqualified from last year’s International Boxing Association-run world championships, where Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting both failed an unspecified gender-eligibility test. Reportedly, the 25-year-old’s test presented a difference in sexual development saying she has XY chromosomes – which are seen in men.
However, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has stood by its decision to let the pair compete at the Paris Games for the simple reason that both are women. Both were born girls and have grown up competing as females.
IOC president Thomas Bach said at a press conference: “We are not talking about the transgender issue here. This is about a woman taking part in a woman’s category. But I repeat here this is not a DSD [differences in sex development] case.”
Guy Body's view. Cartoon / Guy Body, NZ Herald
What Khelif is copping hate-speech over is actually a common gene found in cis-gendered women. A study by the Yale School of Medicine found that eight of 3387 female athletes competing at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics had a Y chromosome.
This difference in chromosome is no guarantee of success. Khelif hasn’t always been top of her class: At the Tokyo Games, she was knocked out in the quarter-finals.
Despite her singularity, she’s worked just as hard as any of her competitors to reach the top of their game.
Just like a tall basketballer, a left-handed tennis player or a solid rugby player, Kehlif’s so-called advantage is beyond her control – and therefore she should not be treated differently because of it.
Impact sports are categorised by weight class for a reason – then it’s up to the individual to prepare themselves for that. Can’t compete? Too bad.
