Taiwanese boxer Lin Yu-ting (林郁婷) in the women’s featherweight division and Algerian boxer Imane Khelif in the women’s welterweight division at this year’s Paris Summer Olympics have become the focus of international attention over gender eligibility disputes.
The controversy began on Aug. 1 after Italian boxer Angela Carini abruptly abandoned her fight with Khelif after 46 seconds in the first round. She later fell to her knees sobbing and declined to shake hands with Khelif. She said she had never been punched so hard, and decided to quit the fight.
Khelif’s victory roused transgender anxiety among some well-known public figures, including British author J.K. Rowling, who baselessly called Khelif a man and her win “a man beating a woman in public for your entertainment.” Tech entrepreneur Elon Musk also endorsed a post that included a photo of Carini with the statement “men don’t belong in women’s sports,” and replied: “absolutely.”
After Lin beat Bulgarian boxer Svetlana Staneva in the featherweight quarter-final and Turkey’s Esra Yildiz Kahraman in the semi-final, Staneva and Kahraman crossed their fingers into an “X” sign, interpreted by many as hinting they have a pair of X chromosomes and are “real biological women.”
Lin and Khelif were disqualified by the International Boxing Association (IBA) from its World Boxing Championships last year, saying that a gender eligibility test showed they had “competitive advantages over other female competitors.” Lin was stripped of her bronze medal, and Khelif disqualified shortly after she defeated a Russian boxer and hours before her gold medal bout.
However, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) removed the IBA from its governing role in 2019 due to concerns about its ethics, credibility and lack of financial transparency. The IBA also failed to specify what tests the boxers took, provided no documentation and gave conflicting statements.
IBA president Umar Kremlev reportedly said that Khelif and Lin had “XY chromosomes,” but on Monday last week said the tests showed the boxers had “elevated testosterone,” contradicting an IBA written statement that “the athletes did not undergo a testosterone examination.”
Meanwhile, IOC officials have strongly backed the two boxers, saying that Khelif “was born female, was registered female, lived her life as a female, boxed as a female, has a female passport. This is not a transgender case,” and repeatedly confirmed Lin’s eligibility to fight in a women’s division.
“This is not a question of inclusion. That never played a role in all this,” IOC president Thomas Bach said. “Women must be allowed to take part in women’s competitions, and the two are women.”
Moreover, changing one’s registered gender in Algeria is illegal, and Khelif and Lin have never been identified as transgender or intersex. Both have also competed in women’s boxing for years, including the Tokyo Olympics 2020, and have lost to many women.
It is ironic that anti-trans advocates have long argued that people remain the sex they were assigned at birth, but call Khelif and Lin “men,” even though they are cisgender women who were born female, and identified and lived their life as females, because they were “too strong” or “don’t look feminine enough.”
The Games are about fair play, and a fundamental principle is the practice of sport as a human right without discrimination. Fairness can be questioned if athletes do not respect the rules, or enhanced their performance through doping; it should not be based on misogynistic speculation. As there is no proof Khelif and Lin have higher testosterone levels or XY chromosomes, and they have complied with the Games’ eligibility, entry and medical requirements, they should not be bullied, discriminated against or denied their right to compete just because they seem “masculine.”
The IOC made the right decision to protect Khelif’s and Lin’s right to compete fairly, as the women they were born as and continue to be.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS