Women's Olympic boxing: 'It's not fair!' Or is it?

This long, hot, sporty summer rolls on. Schools have been broken up for weeks, and children are everywhere - including all over my home! My three sons scrap over just about everything in the summer heat. Cries of ‘It’s not fair!’ seem to constantly ring out from one or the other; but how do I discern whose rights matter more when push comes to (literal) shove between the children?

Over in Paris, the Olympic women’s boxing has also been dominated by cries of ‘It’s not fair!’ Just 46 seconds into her bout against Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, Italian Angela Carini was punched so hard in the face that she fell to the floor weeping, ended the fight, saying to those in her corner 'Non è giusto' ('It’s not fair'). Later, she said she had feared for her life.

Her opponent, Khelif, was banned from competing in the 2023 World Championships for failing tests to meet the ‘eligibility criteria’ for participating in women’s competition - reportedly after tests revealed that she had male XY chromosomes. Britain’s gold winning boxer Nicola Adams called it ‘unfair and dangerous.’ Many have spoken out about their strong feelings about the 46-second fight - everyone from Donald Trump to the United Nations expert on violence against women and girls.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) statement following the fight said that ‘every person has the right to practise sport without discrimination.’ But how in fact has it kept these two women safe? Carini feared for her life – and Khelif’s sex is now the subject of ongoing international speculation, especially online, which can scarcely be easy for her.

Murky waters

The water we are all peering into on this issue is looking very murky. Neither the IOC nor the International Boxing Association (IBA, who ran the 2023 eligibility tests on Khelif that led to her disqualification) have really clarified anything, nor have they lessened the growing crisis. When it comes to the IOC, President Thomas Bach has tried to dismiss it as a 'politically motivated culture war,’ and spokesperson Mark Adams warned against a 'witch hunt' against individual competitors. And when it comes to the IBA, well, this has had years of troubled governance, a lack of transparency, and increasing links to Russia. It has also poured oil onto these murky troubled waters by announcing that it will award Angela Carini $50,000 in prize money, despite her losing her fight.

In 2021 the IOC published its ‘framework on fairness, inclusion and non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sex variations’. This states, among other things, that 'everyone, regardless of their gender identity, expression and/or sex variations should be able to participate in sport safely and without prejudice.' But it did allow for some restrictions, so long as they were 'based on robust and peer reviewed research' including evidence showing a 'consistent, unfair, disproportionate competitive advantage in performance and/or an unpreventable risk to the physical safety of other athletes.'

Differences in Sex Development (DSD)

But what if some competitors are found to have differences in sex development (DSD)? Not to be confused with transgender issues, DSD, according to the NHS website 'is a group of rare conditions involving genes, hormones and reproductive organs, including genitals. It means a person's sex development is far from typical.' It may involve 'sex chromosomes (bundles of genes) usually associated with being female (XX chromosomes) or usually associated with being male (XY chromosomes), but reproductive organs and genitals that may look different from usual.'

A person with DSD might thus have gone through male puberty, with all the physical advantages that this provides - for example studies show that a man’s average power during a punching motion was 162% greater than a woman’s. But – and it is a big but - despite this biological change, due to their DNA, their differences due to their DSD may well have led to them being labelled female at birth, and indeed raised as a girl. They may have reached adulthood understanding and completely believing themselves to be women, with everyone they know treating them likewise. What, therefore, will being fair, inclusive and not discriminating against someone in this situation look like? At the same time, however, how is it possible to also be fair, inclusive and not discriminate against women like Angela Carini, who have trained so faithfully for the fight of a lifetime, expecting it to be a (relatively!) safe and level playing field, especially in a combat sport. Is it even possible to be ‘fair’ to both?

It certainly doesn’t feel fair. Watching Angela Carini fall to the floor so swiftly was hard, and seeing her express her fears for her very life in a sports match didn’t feel fair either. Hence there was a wholly understandable outpouring of anger and frustration, fuelled further by mis- (or perhaps even dis-) information. At the same time the vitriol directed at Imane Khelif isn’t fair either.

Human anger

There remains so much here we simply don’t know. The book of James reminds us to be ‘slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God’. And the anger of man on social media, full of vitriol and hatred, is so often particularly unpleasant and unproductive.

Despite all the anger, so far the IOC has stuck to its guns and insists that Khelif is a woman simply because it says so in her passport – thus avoiding engaging with the complexities of DSD. And meanwhile, even if the IBA did break medical confidentiality now and formally publish the results of their previous genetic tests, its issues and behaviour to date would likely leave many sceptical, whatever the results actually said.

What the anger of man (and woman!) expressed so far looks most likely to achieve has nothing to do with gender rules or the safety of women in the boxing ring, but instead be the removal of boxing from future Olympic games. Boxers may then find themselves uniting in further cries of ‘it’s not fair’ in protest.

It is all horribly complicated, concerns the lives of real people, and yes, terribly unfair. Inclusion is important; no-one should be discriminated against. But surely the physical safety of competitors is paramount. Whatever else might be said, we cannot risk women’s safety in the boxing ring and the possibility of serious injury or death for want of better processes and governance in the complex area of gender disorders and testing from those in leadership? Sticks and stones may break your bones, words might really hurt you – but one powerful punch from someone who has gone through male puberty could potentially cause fatal harm to a woman. And fatal harm to the sport of boxing too.