• @BaldManGoomba
    link
    English
    61 month ago

    Read your article again “Khelif’s thoroughly dominant showing on Thursday will only inflame the debate over whether she and Chinese Tapei’s Lin Yu‑ting should be allowed to compete at the Paris Olympics. Last year, at the World Boxing Championships in New Delhi, Khelif was disqualified hours before her gold-medal bout as a result of International Boxing Association rules that prevent athletes with XY chromosomes from competing in women’s events. The IBA disqualified Yu-Ting before her bronze medal bout for the same reason.”

    It says they used a rule doesn’t say she has xy chromosomes. In your same article the IBA that claimed they were disqualified after they won was also stripped as a governing body of boxing since they have had tons of scandals and corruption

    “The International Olympic Committee has since stripped the IBA of its status as the global governing body for boxing because of long-running governance issues and a series of judging scandals. That leaves boxing in Paris under the umbrella of the IOC’s Paris 2024 Boxing unit, which has more relaxed rules than the IBA and has chosen to disregard the results of Khelif’s and Yu-Ting’s gender eligibility tests last year”

      • @Plopp
        link
        English
        61 month ago

        I’m no languageist but I’d call that indirectly.

      • @Alexstarfire
        link
        English
        41 month ago

        You’re basically saying guilty until proven innocent here. They say she broke that rule therefore she must have. This isn’t a criminal case but having actual proof goes a long way.

      • @BaldManGoomba
        link
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        No direct source claims A has d. All direct sourced is Person A was disqualified from event B because of rule C saying people with D cannot compete

          • @BaldManGoomba
            link
            English
            21 month ago

            One last attempt. Just cause Person A was disqualified from event B because of rule C saying people with D cannot compete. You are concluding person A has D. That event runner got in trouble for corruption. There could be other conclusions than making an assumption or jumping to conclusions. Way more variables and lots to question on the even runners and even the test.

            At the end of the day we should have a more confirmed test but at the end of the day all the athletes were fine with all other participants until they werent