What's up with the Olympic boxers?

Two Olympic boxers with XY chromosomes are at the center of a firestorm, and almost no one's getting it right.

This isn't your typical transgender athlete controversy, where a man anoints himself a woman, then destroys biological women in sports competitions. This is far more complex and deserves a nuanced look, not politically-charged assumptions.

"What is a woman?" The answer is usually straightforward, not counting transgender activists who struggle with it, twisting science in a way that would make a flat earther proud. But the case of these two boxers—Algerian Imane Khelif and Taiwanese Lin Yu-ting—isn't clear-cut.

Their medical conditions aren’t public, but both athletes were considered female since birth and have always identified as women. Yet, genetic tests reportedly show they have XY chromosomes and higher-than-typical female testosterone levels. 

The boxers likely have one of two conditions: 5-alpha reductase deficiency (5-ARD) or partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS). Both are disorders of sex development that can result in XY individuals with some male characteristics but who may appear female at birth.

In 5-ARD, the body lacks an enzyme which affects how it processes testosterone. This can lead to female-appearing genitalia at birth, but significant masculinization during puberty. PAIS involves partial resistance to male hormones, resulting in varying degrees of male physical development.

These conditions can give them athletic advantages. Higher testosterone levels contribute to increased muscle mass, bone density, and overall strength – crucial factors in boxing. The body composition and cardiovascular capacity of these athletes might be more typical of males. 

But are they women? Consider:

• They have an extra X chromosome, and often have high testosterone levels, sometimes higher than men, but process it differently.

• Their genitalia can vary, ranging from appearing female to that of a partially formed male. They’re usually infertile, and typically have testes present but often undescended.

• They can have more female characteristics of less body muscle and a more feminine fat distribution.

• They often lack the typical male patterns of body and facial hair.

So are they women? It’s not an easy answer, but it’s probably fair to say they lean more towards being men than women. They likely have an advantage over females, although that’s no easy thing to measure.

Outside of dividing them into male/female camps, athletes with biological advantages are part of the games. Swimmer Michael Phelps is an absolute freak. He’s 6’4” tall, with an even longer wingspan, and a torso that’s the equivalent of 6’8” man. He can hyperextend his joints, and uses double-jointed elbows for more power. He has massive hands, and size-14 feet that act like flippers. There’s nothing “fair” about Michael Phelps’ body.

But if sporting organizations continue to divide humans into “men” and “women” categories, they’ll need to define those words. Or answer, more specifically, “Does this athlete’s biological advantages give them too much of an advantage against women?”

Instead, the Olympics has issued a "Framework on Fairness" about the issue, which does little more than string platitudes together. It's a loose set of guidelines given to the governing boards of sports organizations that qualify athletes for the games, but provides no standards. In this instance, the IOC has banished the Intl. Boxing Association, which had disqualified the boxers, so the IOC itself is in charge of Olympic boxing.

The IOC moved away from biological testing, pointing out that testosterone tests aren't a perfect answer because some women have naturally high testosterone in the male range. Fair point. Their solution? Abandon science completely.

Mark Adams, the IOC spokesman, was clear: "I think we agreed, I hope we're agreed, we're not going to go back to the bad old days of 'sex testing'. That would be a bad idea.”

Their ‘good’ idea? “They are women in their passports and it is stated that is the case.”

So, quite literally, the Olympics has abdicated its role to the Tunisian passport office. The IOC is more afraid of making a gender decision than to ensure fair and safe games for its female athletes. In other words, they’re cowards.

Any decision would make someone unhappy, of course. On one hand, we have athletes with likely biological advantages competing against women who don't share those advantages. On the other, we have individuals who have lived their entire lives as women suddenly facing scrutiny and potential exclusion from a sport where for years they’ve been recognized as women.

The anger generated by the nonsense of men simply declaring themselves to be women and competing in female sports is well-deserved. But these two boxers aren't that. 

They’re not activists switching their gender or seeking out victimhood. They were dealt a bizarre hand in life, and it’s difficult to imagine how hard life must be for them, especially now thrust into a global controversy over the very essence of their identity. 

They deserve sympathy and fair treatment. And the Olympics needs to make its rules clear and fair to all.

— Ken