• jetA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months 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”

      • jetA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        deleted by creator

          • jetA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            deleted by creator

        • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months 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.

          • jetA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            deleted by creator

        • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months 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

          • jetA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            deleted by creator

            • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 months 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