Skip to content

The IOC is failing to protect female athletes.

After seeing much misinformation and confusion around the current situation within women’s boxing at the Olympics, in particular the inclusion of two boxers who were deemed ineligible for women’s boxing after eligibility testing, The Countess sports working group has put together this short explainer on why the female category exists, how it interacts with disorders of sexual development (DSDs), and how it should be protected.

The category of female within sport exists to give women and girls access to safe and fair competition. Males, especially post puberty, are conferred with physical advantages such as ability to run faster and jump higher or longer and denser muscles resulting in more powerful punches. If there were no female categories in sports competitions, opportunities for women to excel in sport would not exist. This is the reason we call for clear entry criteria to the female category in every sport, based on sex at birth, as confirmed by cheek swab testing in elite sport. There should be no males, regardless of transgender identity or otherwise, allowed to enter the female category.

The female chromosome pattern is XX and the male chromosome pattern is XY. It is the Y chromosome that triggers male development. There are some extremely rare cases where normal development does not occur and these are called disorders of sexual development (DSDs). Within sport, the most relevant DSD is XY 5-ARD. This is a male-specific disorder where the male fetus is unable to respond normally to testosterone in utero and develops female-appearing or ambiguous external genitalia. It is usually detected shortly after birth but can remain undetected, where the medical infrastructure is less technologically advanced. In this condition, the male infant will still have internal testes and thus will produce his own testosterone, to which his body then responds normally. He will experience male puberty and develop male physical attributes like increased muscle mass and normal male height. He will have a normal male level of testosterone (he will not be “a woman with high testosterone”). This male puberty confers the same advantage as if he did not have the DSD.

Because some athletes who have been identified as female at birth are later found to have these DSDs, The Countess, along with many other sports organisations for women, have called for the immediate re-introduction of eligibility screening tests. These tests should occur when athletes commence elite competitions or at age 18. Most female athletes support the use of sex screening tests. These are simple tests, conducted  by swabbing the inside of the cheek, that can identify if an individual has a Y chromosome. A cheek swab test that indicates the presence of a Y chromosome should prompt further investigation and confirmation of the type of DSD present. If the DSD is known to confer male advantage, the athlete should be advised to enter the male or open category. It is unfair and unsafe for women to allow males into their sporting category.

This kind of discrimination was found to be both necessary and lawful by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in the case of Caster Semenya versus the International Association of Athletics Federations, for reasons of fairness and to protect the integrity of the female category.

The eligibility for the female category in some Olympic events, e.g. athletics, swimming and cycling, is determined by the sports international governing bodies, with World Athletics, World Aquatics and the Union Cycliste Internationale all protecting the female category at this year’s Olympics.

The recent scandal has arisen around  boxers Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting precisely because the approach of the IOC is to NOT test the eligibility of athletes in this way. The IOC said in its statement that “As with previous Olympic boxing competitions, the gender and age of the athletes are based on their passport.” It is worth noting that the previous Olympics also had its own internal (IOC) governance for the boxing competition so, essentially, they are following their own rules and not those of the International Boxing Association (IBA), who define female as having XX chromosomes. The IBA tested the two boxers, on two occasions, and found that they did not qualify for entry to the female category. The IBA are legally bound to keep the type of testing and the results confidential, and the boxers plus their country federations have sent legal notice to this effect.

Because the boxers refuse to release the results, and because neither appealed to the Court of Arbitration of Sport, we cannot be certain of the reason for their disqualification (i.e. if they have a DSD or a normal male phenotype). It is assumed by many that they have the 5-ARD DSD mentioned above. In any case, these boxers have been determined to be male and to be ineligible for entry to IBA women’s boxing competitions.

It is the ideological stance of the IOC that safely and fairness for female athletes are far less important than the right of “inclusion’” as evidenced by its own framework. It is this ideological stance that has put female boxers at risk, excluded two women from their own competition and allowed the advancement of two male boxers to the finals in their respective weight categories. It has also led to much speculation as to the private lives of the two boxers and some negative online commentary. All this could have been avoided if the IOC heeded the letter written by the IBA before the games and excluded these athletes. Alternatively, the IOC could have tested all the athletes and in this way ensured that there would be no males in the female category of any event and avoided singling out these two boxers.

We do not wish to see any individuals being abused; however we cannot be silent when the risks to women are so great. A male punch is up to 160% stronger than a female’s punch. A woman’s risk of concussion and brain injury is already higher than a man’s. Women should not have to choose between the sport she loves, her chance of an Olympic medal, and a risk of severe injury. She should be protected and have safe and fair sport.

It’s time to bring back sex testing and protect the female category.

TDLR:

The IOC are running boxing at this year’s Olympics.

The IOC do not test athletes who enter the female category, instead they use what’s on their passport.

The IBA tested two boxers and found them ineligible for women’s boxing; these boxers are therefore assumed to be male. The boxers did not appeal the IBA bans.

The IBA informed the IOC – the IOC acknowledged this.

The IOC do not wish to exclude anyone from women’s boxing, even if they are male.

The situation is dangerous and unfair.

Most female athletes support sex eligibility testing (over 90%).

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/5-alpha-reductase-deficiency/

https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Award_-_redacted_-_Semenya_ASA_IAAF.pdf (in particular, page 160)

https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/Beyond-the-Games/Human-Rights/IOC-Framework-Fairness-Inclusion-Non-discrimination-2021.pdf#_ga=2.219716894.621299853.1686571450-594927581.1678187184