You mean the boxing federation filled corruption and that was disqualified by the Olympics?

I would disagree. As another poster pointed out, there are serious questions about the integrity of the IBA, not least the fact that they aren’t recognised by the IOC. To suggest that the IOC wouldn’t have clear eligibility criteria feels at best misguided.

The president of the IBA (Umar Kremlev) is a Russian in a position of privilege, a position that is easily influence by Putin’s agenda (who hate anything pro LGBTQ+). I would argue, with plenty of facts to back it up, that the IBA is compromised and is unable to have a neutral stance on this matter.

Under Kremlev’s tenure as IBA head, he has heavily marketed himself, moved the IBA’s operations to Russia, suspended Ukraine from the IBA, and made the Russian state-owned energy giant Gazprom the sole sponsor of the IBA… The IOC stated that the IBA had failed to address governance, finance and corruption concerns.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Kremlev

Oh fuck off. For one, it’s not even clear whether higher testosterone levels really give an athlete that much of an edge - many high level male athletes have comparatively low testosterone levels. Secondly, the forms of doping that involve testosterone are not manifesting themselves purely in higher testosterone levels - there are other tests for that. If there was any suspicion that this athlete was doping, they’d run the gamut on her - note how many athletes were already suspended this year, and they’re not from comparatively poor countries like Algeria.

If a male boxer beats an opponent to a pulp, then we collectively shrug and move on. Oh well, he was just better. Poor matchmaking. But when it involves women, suddenly there must be something wrong with the athlete who, applying Occam’s Razor, simply was stronger.

she “had never been punched that hard before”

Didn’t at least one person say the same thing about Mike Tyson?

Being better than everyone else might mean cheating, but it also might mean they are just better. No way for us plebs on the ground to know. It sounds like the IBC has not fostered enough trust to be taken at their word.

That being the case, it seems reasonable to take Imane’s word for it until the matter can be settled by a trustworthy body.

She has previously tested for high testosterone levels in a test that was, by the words of an IOC official, "cobbled together, as I understand, overnight [during the world championships] to change the results.” The nature of the tests was unspecified, and the governing body has been banned from the Olympics over governance and corruption issues. It has been insinuated that the unspecified test at the world championships was only administered by the Russian-led IBA after Khelif defeated a Russian athlete.

Khelif was born a woman, has identified as a woman all her life, and was even banned from boxing as a child by her father because he deemed it to be ‘not for girls’. She has competed for years, has wins and losses in her belt like any other athlete.

And yes, as you say, high testosterone levels in women can occur due to a variety of reasons, including medical ones. So we should not immediately suspect foul play when a high performing female athlete has above average testosterone.

Since I’m on my phone I am not going to deeplink each claim - receipts are in the following articles:

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/olympics-boxer-imane-khelif-anti-trans-rcna164721

https://apnews.com/article/olympics-2024-boxing-gender-4b6eb881cce9c34484d30c68ad979127

And one more thing: a man would never be subject to this kind of demeaning scrutiny even if he seriously outperforms his peers. Michael Phelps has unusual body features that give him an almost unfair edge over competitors. He has won 20 gold medals in his career. His success is attributed to skill and hard work. Katy Ledecky has matched his medal tally, and was subjected to the same suspicions and demeaning scrutiny as Khelif is now. Hint: there is no evidence that she is anything but a woman. The gender scrutiny of high performing female athletes goes back to the 1930s, because for some reason high performing women with a perceived unusual or ‘non-feminine’ physique are immediately suspect.