1144
JK Rowling falls silent as she could be prosecuted in Imane Khelif lawsuit
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024
1144 points (96.6% liked)
News
23296 readers
3514 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So as long as we're speculating, what reason does the IBA have for not releasing the results of their test then? Are you even a fan of women's combat sports? What about her performance leads you to believe a woman without DSD couldn't achieve it? It's also kind of obvious why the IOC went out of their way to say she's not trans, hint hint it has something to do with where she's from. But ultimately I want you to recognize there's no evidence one way or the other on if she has DSD.
There is evidence, you may not feel like it's clear enough to definitively determine DSD and that's fair, neither do I, but the fact its ambiguous and no one will deny is enough that it's not unreasonable to think.
You're also being incredibly unfair in your analysis saying they "corrected" their statement from DSD to trans because of her origin country. That explanation makes no sense, you wouldn't correct that statement unless there was something wrong with it. Correction implies you said something incorrect. Saying it's not DSD is correct right? So what's their to correct, only thing to say is adding additional information that she's also not trans.
Amidst both allegations of DSD and trans, if you really want to clear the air you would dispell both, instead they tried to clear one then corrected it to the other as if their mutually exclusive?
You're being absurd at this point. I respect your opinion but if you're going to gaslight people into questioning things on reasonable grounds then you're not at all genuine. Because you have your own opinions and political beliefs, you will overlook odd behavior, anomalies or coincidences and proclaim zero evidence which is why theirs no further discussion to be had.
No one here here is trying to prove anything about anyone, only that it's not a baseless assumption and that we need answers on whether or not people with DSD are allowed to compete in female combat sports which they wont make clear. Anything beyond that is outside my scope, it's a legitimate concern. Thank you and have a good day.
So just to be clear since none of this addresses 80% of what I said, there's no reason for the IBA keeping the results of her failed tests a secret and you've never watched any women's combat sports prior to this in your life? Color me shocked. I hope your uninformed takes on the next scandal you jump in on are better received I guess. Or maybe you can just listen and become better informed? Nah that's a pipe dream I'm sure.
I didn't respond to that question because its irrelevant. What does me watching female combat sports have to do with anything? (Nothing, its just an attempted jab at me) meanwhile you didn't respond to all my claims, while mine are actually related to the argument.
But I'll answer your question despite its purpose & irrelevance. My daughter is a wrestler and I'm a kick boxer & brazilian jujitsu artist, so yes I keep up on female sports because of my child & I have a general care for fighter safety because I'm empathetic, have personally seen people get hurt and I know how dangerous combat sports are. If you're going to try to setup gotcha's that's exactly why I've ended the discussion.
As for IBA, I assume like most company's they don't publically release medical tests of their fighters. If they have a history of posting sex results then let me know. If they have a history and she consented for it to be shown, them also let me know. I would assume they either have a policy against showing it, or they didn't acquire consent to show it, that's a very reasonable answer but you won't accept anything.
The same way you claim DSD can't be argued, you can't argued against the tests because you don't have proof it was faked just circumstantial evidence because their "corrupt" and "fighter loss", just like people on the opposite side have circumstantial evidence as well.
YOU made the claim that she had DSD with no proof. What else needs to be said.
I'm sure you really care about fighter safety, unless it's witch hunting athletes online with no evidence, then it's open season. If you knew anything about the sport this conversation wouldn't be happening. She was the better boxer in all her bouts by a wide margin.
Why don't you take that whole paragraph about the IBA and apply it to the IOC?
I never made the claim she had DSD, I stated it's ambiguous and no one knows, while you're acting certain you know for sure. I put forward proof of this ambiguity while you put forward zero rebuttal and nonsensical questions like "do you watch female sports?". You're trying to avoid all accountability and intellectual dialogue. Have a good one
Yeah I'm the one avoiding accountability haha