Olympic boxing has occasionally sparked moments of excitement and controversy over the years. There have been walk-outs, sit-ins, and issues with judging. The Cuba-USA match-ups have offered much entertainment. More often than not, however, boxing seems relegated to the sidelines at the grand summer festival, tucked away like a low-ranking relative, taking place in a distant hall, wedged between the main events.
Enter Paris 2024. We are not merely navigating through a single looking glass; rather, we find ourselves amidst multiple reflections with no clear path back. Welcome to the realm of Olympic boxing as a reflection of antagonistic geopolitics, a stage for global confrontations—one where critical matters affecting people’s lives are transformed into opportunities for political maneuvering and strategic posturing.
At the heart of this tumult are two women in their 20s who are not attempting to cheat or misuse performance enhancers. By all accounts, they were born female and have identified as such throughout their lives. They may or may not be dealing with a condition commonly referred to as DSD (differences in sex development), although opinions on this vary and the facts remain unclear.
DSD can manifest in various ways but often includes the presence of male hormones or organs that could provide an athletic edge. Athletes sometimes discover this condition only when competing, which can be a distressing experience.
Should we navigate this situation with care, empathy, and understanding? That certainly seems one viable approach. However, the reality remains that we are approaching boxing at Paris 2024, a landscape fraught with misinformation and half-truths, where powerful opinions are often shaped by superficial perceptions, rendering little consideration for the actual individuals involved. This week, the sport descended into genuine absurdity with the chaotic press conference hosted by the International Boxing Association, which yielded revealing yet troubling exchanges.
In moments like these, the underlying issues begin to emerge clearly. Notably, we witnessed a room filled with influential middle-aged men debating with another group of similar men over the future of women’s sports. Each faction presented itself as advocates, allies, and defenders of female athletes, but this may have been more a power struggle than a genuine discussion about women’s rights in sports.
What is glaringly apparent is the dynamic between two opposing sports organizations engaged in a contentious rivalry, utilizing the rights of women and the unresolved complexities of trans rights as leverage in their political battleground. Umar Kremlev, the IBA president and an ally of Vladimir Putin, made his position starkly evident through his comments directed at the gathered media.
One memorable statement was, “We don’t verify what they have between their legs,” delivered against a backdrop that seemed to emphasize a moral high ground. He also referred to Thomas Bach with a homophobic term seemingly inspired by the Paris 2024 opening ceremony.
Kremlev asserted that the Olympics was “trying to do everything to destroy feminine sports competitions,” a statement unsupported by facts. Ioannis Filippatos, a doctor and IBA executive, claimed that he understands what constitutes a woman, mentioning his experience delivering many babies.
“As a Christian, believing in God, I disagree with this presentation of the scripture,” Kremlev commented at one point. While we can respect differing beliefs, clarity regarding the IBA’s position on women with atypical sexual characteristics is sorely lacking; instead, there was a consistent, blunt assessment that declared, “they are men.”
Essentially, this gathering comprised lobbyists with vested interests in a much larger conflict. The IOC and IBA’s relationship has been strained since 2019, when the latter was suspended from its position as the overseeing body of Olympic boxing.
With this clear animosity, Kremlev’s affiliations, and Russia’s stated intention to disrupt the Games, it is astonishing that the IOC did not foresee these issues, fail to establish stricter regulations, and thus allow themselves to be overshadowed and ridiculed by a hostile organization.
When someone like Kremlev can portray himself as a defender of fundamental rights and a voice of reason, clearly something has gone awry. It appears that Bach hoped this situation would simply disappear. The lack of decisive governance is so evident it should arguably warrant resignations.
Most concerning is that the IOC has allowed the two women at the center of this controversy, regardless of the ultimate resolution of their situations, to become pawns in this larger conflict.
after newsletter promotion
One critical aspect that continues to be ignored is that the two boxers have not sought any of this turmoil and are essentially the ones suffering through it. Khelif has been competing at this level since 2018, while Lin has been active since 2017. Khelif hails from a background of significant poverty and a conservative family in a traditional society. Her father, an unemployed welder, has felt the pressure to present the world’s media with her birth certificates and childhood photographs.
She has openly discussed the immense impact that external pressures have had on her, describing a feeling of being bullied not just by individuals, but by society as a whole. Her previous competitor, Luca Hamori, has spent time in Hungarian media making provocative statements and posting mocking images of Khelif as a minotaur. Following her victory, a tearful Khelif hurried through a congested mixed zone, where former Algerian athlete Hassiba Boulmerka could be heard calling out: “Leave her alone! She is going through hell.”
Lin Yu-Ting is similarly affected; she, too, was raised as a girl, enjoys widespread affection in Taiwan, where she is known as ‘Ting’ on social media—her Instagram handle is Tingboxing—and her situation has elicited strong protective sentiments from her supporters.
Throughout this turmoil, the IOC has appeared weak, indecisive, and reluctant to take a stand. Kremlev, regardless of the complexities of the situation, is evidently eager for a different type of confrontation. These are intricately layered issues, not just for the realm of sports but for humanity in general. They pertain to the rights of girls to engage in sports and compete within their own domains, the challenges faced by elite and amateur athletes, and the rights of transgender individuals who have been unwittingly thrust into the fray of someone else’s conflict.
The most compassionate observation this week may have come from 35-year-old French boxer Emilie Sonvico, who shared with L’Equipe her experiences with sex verification tests, describing them as “visual tests, during tournaments,” which involve having to lower one’s pants. “The first time, I was not aware and I did not understand. The second time, I had been warned and I even arrived in a bra.” Indeed, welcome to boxing—the perfect arena for resolving these complexities.
Sonvico, who has faced Khelif before and is relatively unimpressed by her strength, stated, “She’s not the most powerful I’ve faced. She hits hard, but she’s not a puncher who can knock you out in one hit.”
Best of all, Sonvico, an experienced female athlete involved in boxing, put forth a level-headed suggestion for resolution: “After the Games, the leaders will have to sit down around a table and stop hiding this problem. But for Khelif, this controversy was unnecessary. Women with atypical physiques already endure significant pressure in their daily lives. To add insults on top of that makes it extremely challenging.”
