A New Olympic Sport

~ Clarissa

Men beating up women for the enjoyment of the public is now an Olympic sport.

Italian athlete Angela Carini had to abandon the boxing ring after 46 seconds of being pummeled by a male boxer.

He didn’t say anything about her, just hit her in the face with all the physical advantage a man has over a woman. We don’t care as much about actions as we do about words, so this will not cause nearly as much outrage as when somebody said something vaguely unpleasant.

We are on track to watching a man kill a woman during a sporting event, and we’ll smile and call him “she” because it’s all about what one says, not what one is or does.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Clarissa

93 thoughts on “A New Olympic Sport”

  1. (incomprehension)

    Why do they keep doing this? It’s not like we don’t know how it turns out. Are we that far into denying reality or is it a public humiliation ritual: quit or be crushed?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    2. The Algerian dude is being referred to as “she” by Wikipedia and the press. People can get cancelled by stating that he’s male. And many accommodating creatures are successfully convincing themselves that a he’s a she, and only a bigot would see a problem here.

      Let’s never forget how overpowering the desire to conform is in most people.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      2. “Algerian dude is being referred to as “she””

        To be clear, the claim is that the person in question is not trans and was raised female due to external anatomy. My assumption is that they have some rare intersex condition like the SAFrican runner a few years ago.

        That said, I still think there’s no place for them in the Olympics, especially in a contact fighting sport.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

          1. “push to call him intersex, which I believe is a fabrication”

            I’ll remain agnostic on that front for the time being.

            But apparently they have XY chromosones so should not be allowed in the ring to fight women.

            It’s a scandal that the olympics have allowed this when the international women’s boxing organization doesn’t.

            Liked by 2 people

            Reply

        2. Pretty sure the IOC has rules about women who take steroids (ala the old Soviet track and field teams), as well as athletes with weird medical conditions that cause them to have seriously abnormal hormone levels.

          10/1 odds that athlete has testicles, even if he hasn’t got the rest of the package. Ultrasound and a blood test would sort that out quickly.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

        3. The IBA did not allow the two boxers — Yu-ting of Taiwan and Khelif of Algeria — to compete in 2023 world championships because they failed the gender eligibility test. External paraphernalia notwithstanding — both were found to have XY chromosomes and associated hormones. Surprise surprise — biology cannot be denied!

          Why not have special Olympics for trans-athletes like paralympics?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

              1. I’m well aware of that, as I suffered PCOS for ten years. Gave me a friggin’ goatee, but not narrow hips, low bodyfat percentage, or manly musculature.

                Like

      2. Robert, I know you don’t mean to be hurtful but it does hurt a lot when people use Russia as a pretext to settle their ideological battles. This is not caused by Russia and has nothing to do with Russia. And it hurts like the absolute dickens to see people do this.

        I know you would never do it purposefully. It’s a fad but it’s a fad that is costing my people an enormous lot.

        Like

        Reply

        1. “She had previously competed without issues and was disqualified by the sport’s governing body only after she defeated Russian boxer Azalia Amineva in the 2023 tournament. The IBA is controlled by Umar Kremlev, who is Russian and brought in the state-owned energy supplier Gazprom as its primary sponsor and moved much of the governing body’s operations to Russia.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/who-is-olympian-imane-khelif-an-algerian-woman-boxer-is-facing-anti-trans-backlash

          The IOC banned the IBA from boxing after this and other corrupt activities.

          Like

          Reply

  2. I am not even a sportswoman, and I feel almost a personal pain, betrayal and anger looking at the pictures of a devastated Carini.

    It’s … I have no words left to express my outrage!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. This isn’t like swimming, even. This is a contact sport. It could end very, very badly. But nobody seems to care.

      I mean, we care, of course, but nobody who’s responsible for organizing these events does.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  3. This will not end until every sportswoman and spectators boycott events where men are allowed to compete against women. It is especially reprehensible when this happens in contact sports.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  5. I find myself of two minds here. On the one hand, I despise those who are saying he is a woman. No matter how they repackage it, the Lord had him born male, and he will be male until the day he dies, no matter what mutilations and drugs he subjects himself to. On the other hand I remember growing up listing to the constant harping of women can do anything a man can do, and women are just as strong as men, and watching the tv shows and movies showing nothing but girls beating men up. I also remember the constant push to allow women into men’s sports. So quite frankly whenever a woman meets a man in a combat sport and gets wrecked I have no sympathy for her at all. She could have refused to fight on account of he is a male, but she decided to go through with it and is now complaining that she got beat bloody. I mean no kidding, what did you expect to happen. It’s not like it was unexpected. So no, no sympathy for her at all.

    Should men be in women’s sports, no, but when it does happen, to me the well was poisoned a long time ago, so I have no empathy for the women in those competitions, with the exceptions of those who refused to compete against a male. Those I support, as they are unwilling to bow down to insanity that is seemingly running rampant.

    • – W

    Post Note: I keep saying male instead of man because the guys doing that are not men. They are male and will be to the day they die, but they are by no means men.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. I understand what you are saying but I also understand how it’s hard for an athlete to turn down a chance to participate in the Olympics.

      I’m a lifelong feminist and I despise the feminist trend that denies biological differences between men and women. Unfortunately, this trend won and we are now living with the consequences.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    2. I grew up with all that feminist stuff in the 80s. I’m over forty now, and I’m way past prime athlete age.

      The 18- and 20- yo athletes out there now shouldn’t have to suffer for crap that the boomers did. It’s not their fault. We’ve already tried the experiment Agreed that they should simply boycott, and I admire the athletes doing it. But it’s hard to be the tip of the spear, and potentially give up your whole athletic career in order to take a stand. Many of us applaud them, but most of what they get in public is vicious censure.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. And when I say “tried the experiment” I mean, we tried letting women compete against men in men’s sports– we tried letting them on football teams, we tried having them compete against each other in tennis. We even tried letting them compete against men in *billiards* for pete’s sake: a game where even age isn’t much of a barrier. The women wanted in, because they wanted to be taken seriously as athletes, and because the fame, recognition, and prize money were all better on the men’s side. It was tried. It failed miserably on all counts. We don’t need to keep doing it.

        Like

        Reply

      2. Hmmm, don’t blame the Boomers, that experiment began in the 20’s in the West, slowing only because of the Depression. But the roots go back to at least the 1840’s and more probably to the French Revolution. Actually, some women probably complained when we first left the trees…okay, now that may be hyperbole ;-D

        Like

        Reply

        1. @@oldcowboy3

          “some women probably complained when we first left the trees”

          No, it’s not a hyperbole. Feminist Camille Paglia has written that if it hadn’t been for men we would still be living in caves today.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  6. Yeah, we are the same species but men and women are very, very different animals. We can argue and quibble over intellect but there is no way to argue about physical power, we were clearly once a tournament species. A male’s arms and fists are designed to be weapons, and his greater size and increased heart and lung capacity are designed to overwhelm a competitor, even his bones including his skull is thicker and denser for added protection. Even male instinct, despite all the feminasti hatred, is to protect females. Normal men find a male beating a female sickening.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Yes, truly there is “nothing new under the sun“. Too old to consider it a “wonder”, but we have to at least try to maintain a sense of humour ;-D

        Like

        Reply

  7. I don’t think the Algerian fighter should have been allowed to participate in this event given that they were already excluded from a different event, but I feel like people are making a lot of nasty assumptions in this thread. No one in this thread really knows if the Algerian fighter is transgender or born intersex. Given what little I know of Algeria, intersex actually seems a lot more plausible than transgender.

    Like

    Reply

      1. It’s nasty because it’s the most uncharitable interpretation of events – that this person was born male and chose to transition and compete against women (possibly with the reason behind the transition being the desire to place better when competing).

        The reality is that the person didn’t choose the way they were born, which is intersex.

        I would be happy to change the Olympic categories to “apple” and “orange”, where one of them being people who were born with XX chromosomes and no congenital intersex conditions, and aren’t taking testosterone, and the other category being everyone else, and enforce the rules vigorously.

        I’m guessing most other people would be against that. They’d insist on keeping the category names “male” and “female” and feel offended otherwise.

        Like

        Reply

        1. I’m not that neoliberal, so who chose what is not an interesting category of analysis for me. But I appreciate your explanation and I admit that it’s a difference in worldview that exists and that does deeply impact how one sees the world.

          Like

          Reply

            1. “why didn’t you just stay in the USSR?”

              Not to be a pedantic twit….. oh hell with it, I’m a pedantic twit and proud of it!

              The USSR ended in 1991. Clarissa emigrated from independent Ukraine.

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

              1. Physically emigrated from Ukraine and ideologically emigrated from USSR. Both are choices.

                Like

            2. I didn’t say choice wasn’t important to me. I said it didn’t interest me as a category of analysis.

              Oysters are very important to me. I deeply love eating them. But I don’t categorize people based on how many oysters they eat.

              I skipped lunch, here’s why I’m given to the oyster fantasies.

              Like

              Reply

          2. That was me. I hope you realize that I agree with you when it comes to sports. I think “women” should be restricted to women in the traditional sense.

            I’m for trans rights, but I think “woman” should be defined differently when it comes to sports. It should mean someone who was born with XX chromosomes and developed as expected biologically. Because this is what’s it about in sports. Not how you feel or act, but a biological factor that is completely out of your control, just like all the other ones are (height, lung capacity, etc.).

            Intersex people would be out of luck.

            If it were completely up to me, I would rename the sports categories into “women*” and “men*” with the * being the exact definition.

            So is the big difference in worldviews that I’m happy to call transgender women women?

            Like

            Reply

      2. It’s nasty because people are assuming that this person has testicles and is choosing to take hormones and that has been described in this thread as “Woke DemoCRAP”, “deviant”, evidence of “hatred of women”. And lots of people are assuming this person is really male, but they aren’t really either if they are intersex.

        If it is true that this person is intersex, then I see the whole thing as rather sad for everyone involved.

        Like

        Reply

        1. XY Intersex people with male physical presentation do tend to have testicles. Often internal rather than external. That is why they are shaped like men and have other testosterone-mediated characteristics like facial hair. Why is that “nasty”? I think that must be a hard thing to live with, but I do not think it entitles you to compete in sports against women.

          Liked by 3 people

          Reply

          1. No one said that that being intersex is nasty. What is nasty is the people in this thread saying that intersex people are automatically deviants and women haters.

            Like

            Reply

            2. “You” (or perhaps it was the other anon?), specifically cited the “testicles” thing, which comment was made by me. I did not mean it as a perjorative, but as a very likely possibility given the intersex claims made by the boxing organization when they disqualified this competitor. Ovaries can and do produce testosterone, but not generally in enough quantity to produce that kind of result.

              Liked by 2 people

              Reply

    1. Honestly, wtf is wrong with you people. You are attacking a woman who is a woman. Don’t pretend that you are not giving permission to people who want to hurt women. This boxer’s life is in danger.

      Like

      Reply

        1. Women who appear masculine. Which also happens to include some biological women (XX, typical development, no testosterone supplements). Who are likely to be overrepresented in sport.

          Like

          Reply

      2. @Robert Basil

        “You are attacking a woman who is a woman.”

        Well, that’s one hyperbole-cum-tautology too far.

        No one is attacking this person, and he/she (being that this person presumably presents with DSD while being genetically XY in terms of chromosomes) is quite capable of defending him/herself were he/she to be attacked.

        Now, the issue is fairness in women’s sports. Forget everything else and look at the video: do you think this was a fair match? You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion, as is everyone else, but most people who have not taken leave of their senses will reasonably conclude that one of the two participants was at serious risk of being killed if she had continued to engage. And no, it was not the intersex individual whose sex is marked F in his Algerian passport.

        Oh, I know that, being intersex, this person has been raised in accordance with the externally visible genitalia, and as a result he/she presents as female. Presenting and living as female is within her rights, but this doesn’t give her the right to put other people’s lives at risk.

        Personally, I keep wondering why for so many people on the Left in the West the defense of transgenderism has become the defining issue of our times. Why? Why is it so much more important than rooting out malaria, leprosy and river blindness in Africa, reducing youth unemployment in Europe, responding to the rising military menace of China and a score of other serious problems that are threatening to destroy civilisation?

        One final point: “wtf is wrong with you people” is a brutal and aggressive way of expressing disagreement with other people’s opinions, and does not do anything for the advancement of rational discourse.

        Like

        Reply

        1. It’s strange that we are invited to pore over this person’s childhood pictures and completely disregard today’s photos. My grandma liked to dress my dad in a girly way when he was little. He had the cutest curls. They had a weird dynamic, whatever. This means absolutely nothing for who he was, which is male.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Today’s photos are the reason we are having this discussion. We are invited to look at the childhood photos because people are claiming this person is a transgender woman who was born a man, and other people are trying to refute that.

            I would also say that these photos prove exactly why your analogy with your dad fails. I don’t think a typical mother in Algeria with a male child who she was raising as a boy would dress him in girl clothes to take a picture with others.

            The difference here is between being born as an ordinary-looking boy, being raised as a boy, and sometimes getting dressed in female clothes by an adult relative as a toddler, and being born with a vulva and raised as a girl.

            One of the 5 electives I took in university 20 years ago was an introductory course on human sexuality. There was a ton of biology of sexual development there, with the two important periods being development in utero and puberty. By default, the fetus will develop female genitals unless signaling with an androgen happens. There are many ways in which this signaling can fail, partially or completely, with the baby born with ambiguous genitals or a vulva.

            When I read about the russian head of the corrupt IBA saying this boxer had XY chromosomes, that’s what I thought of. And I do think the russian was telling the truth in this case.

            I remember the case of Caster Semenya well. That was in the news around 2009, before the transgenderism craze, as you would say. I checked when two popular shows with transgender characters premiered – Orange Is the New Black in 2013 and Transparent in 2014.

            Like

            Reply

            1. In what way is this relevant to the question of whether this person should be able to compete with women in contact sports?

              Yes, it is entirely possible that this person is biologically male, born with ambiguous genitalia, or even suffered some disfiguring accident as an infant, and was raised female for cultural reasons. We used to do that in the US, too. We don’t anymore, as a rule, because it’s now considered unethical.

              That is perhaps a sad story, and unfortunate for the athlete. None of it would justify letting this person compete with women in sports.

              Compassion for someone with an unfortunate medical condition– whatever its exact specifics are– isn’t enough to justify letting this person punch women in the head in competition. It is neither safe nor fair to the other athletes.

              Nobody has to hate the athlete in question for this to be true. “People are saying mean things” is not a justification for letting this person in the boxing ring with women.

              I’m all for reasonable accommodation to help people with medical problems participate in normal life. This is not one of those cases. In this case, the argument being made for allowing this person in women’s competitions is essentially: because this person has some unusual medical condition, this person’s right to participate supercedes ALL the other competitors’ rights to a fair fight and a reasonable (for the sport) expectation of safety. That’s not arguing for equality. That’s arguing that an athlete with extremely abnormal physical development has MORE rights than any other competitor.

              If we concede this point, there is no reason for women to continue competing in the Olympics, or any other sporting organization that allows this. What would be the point? They will shortly be crowded out of all the top spots by biological men. At which point all support for women’s sports will simply wither away. They’ve been barely hanging in there for a long time already. If it’s just medically-challenged (or sexually confused, or opportunistic) men competing against each other… where is the audience for that? Who would send their daughters into sports anymore? There would very shortly be a demand to eliminate funding for girls’ sports programs, as they’d no longer be at all relevant– why do all that work, if you have no chance of winning, no chance at the scholarship money, no chance at a spot in the states, nationals, internationals…

              I’ve never been a sporting sort, I’ve got no personal interest in it. But there are millions of women athletes who do. Why should their careers be forfeit to the “we can’t keep anyone out because it isn’t nice” ideology?

              Like

              Reply

              1. I already said that I personally would be OK with biological requirements that would result in Imane Khelif not boxing in the category she is now. But she is not to blame. The sports organizations who determine that are.

                And you were one of the few people who wasn’t vicious to her. I was responding to Clarissa calling her childhood photos irrelevant and the general vitriol towards Khelif in this post and comments.

                Like

              2. It’s irrelevant whose fault it is.

                What matters here is that IOC is trying to virtue-signal women’s sports into oblivion.

                Ultimately this is all just fuel for the anti-woke backlash that is already in motion. I remember liking the Olympics when younger. I will be sad to see it swept away in that conflagration, but the organizers seem really determined to dig their own grave. Maybe it got too expensive and they need a way to end it that makes it “not their fault” or something. The world economy has, after all, been living on money borrowed from the future for decades now. You can’t run that scam forever. IOC is just one of a large number of expensive bureaucracies competing in a race to see who can be first to become so odious to the public that nobody is willing to fund it anymore.

                Liked by 1 person

        2. My “woman who is a woman” phrasing is neither tautology nor hyperbole; it’s rhetoric. Learn how language works, please. (Tautology is saying the same thing using DIFFERENT words. Hyperbole is exaggeration.)

          My “wtf is wrong” phrasing is certainly not “brutal,” though it is invective. It is also appropriate. This female boxer is being slandered and has been put in danger by this slander.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Right. So the purely hypothetical “danger” this boxer is put into by people saying unkind things about him, outweighs the real physical danger his women competitors actually experience in the ring with him.

            Words are violence. Violence is speech. Textbook example.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

            1. I wrote “danger” not “violence.” Get a dictionary and try to learn.

              Calling an Algerian woman a man is not “unkind.” It is calumny. Calling an athlete a cheater is not “unkind.” It is slander.

              Like

              Reply

          2. @Robert Basil

            Examples of common tautologies: “Boys will be boys”, “If you know, you know”, “What’s done’s done”. But never mind, take your rhetorical trip and be happy, that’s fine by me.

            You might find the following of interest, or perhaps not, since it comes from a feminist news outlet, and a militant one at that: https://reduxx.info/international-olympic-committee-was-warned-about-male-boxers-world-boxing-organization-vice-president-says/

            Still, you did not answer why you seem to be so bothered by this issue: why is it so important for you to defend a relativly obscure sports figure whose impact on her [there: are you happy?] opponents is much greater, and riskier and infinitely more dangerous – life-threatening in fact – than any discussions about whether she should participate in fights or not.

            Imane Khelif’s life does not depend on it, women’s boxing does not generate that kind of revenue. In any case she is a darling of the IOC, is vigorously defended by the authorities in her country and is the toast of town in liberal progressive circles far and wide.

            Is that not enough? Is it really necessary to stifle and suppress any counter opinions (libel and slander, no less: do you think commenters on social media who say such things should be sued?) when women say that this is not fair on them, that inclusion cannot mean that women lose out?

            The fight against dogma was based on the right to heterodoxy, and it’s a fight that never ends because new dogmas are newly minted by the hour to prop up the fabric of the authoritarian ideology du jour. Your defence of the new article of faith is baseless and despicable, and women won’t be silenced.

            Like

            Reply

  9. This will not end until every sportswoman and spectators boycott events where men are allowed to compete against women.

    We underestimate the power of the government to punish people who do this. A few months ago there was a story about how some high school girl students refused to race against boys in some track event. Guess what, the entire school sports program was sanctioned and forbidden to participate in sports meets for like 2 years. Thereby, killing the program. 16 year old girls shouldn’t have to be faced with the moral quandary of their actions affecting hundreds of athletes in their entire school but here we are.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. I agree with you. That’s why there needs to be a critical mass of people refusing to comply. It is also up to the adults, not teenagers or children to resist. One team, or a few women here or there are going to be easy to punish. Unfortunately, the widespread resistance is not going to happen as there are enough sincere believers out there who go along with this. Also, it is obvious that women athletes, whether at Olympics or elsewhere, face an enormous pressure in this situation.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. That this happened during the Olympics is probably going to hurt them. It is one thing to beat highschool girls in random towns, quite another to see a woman beaten up live, broadcasted to millions of people all over the world.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. They’ve gotten overconfident, and think optics don’t matter anymore.

          There are some fascinating trends among the under-40 crowd that indicate the tide on all such matters has turned already. Those celebrating victory have not noticed it yet, but it’ll be… something… when the realization sets in.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

      1. Like

        Reply

      2. Child, schmild. There are recent photos where the outlines of his penis are visible under his shorts. It’s a dude. Genetic tests showed he’s a dude. He was disqualified from participating as a dude. This is on the Olympics committee that allowed disqualified dudes to participate.

        Like

        Reply

        1. \  This is on the Olympics committee that allowed disqualified dudes to participate.

          There is a minuscule percentage of people born with those gender medical conditions.

          Looks like they all go into sports from the media coverage.

          I would sort all competitions into 2 categories: for pure biological women and for men/others. Of course, special Olympics would remain.

          If somebody ‘in-between’ is prevented from competing in a certain sport with women, it’s not unjust discrimination imo.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Maybe it’s like 7′ tall men and the NBA. Miniscule number of men in the population reach 7′. Miniscule number of men in the population play for the NBA. But the percentage of 7′ tall men who have at some point been recruited for the NBA is *huge*, because just being that tall is such a gigantic advantage in basketball.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

          2. We don’t know if he’s got any conditions. There’s such a wave of propaganda, screeching “intersex” that I suspect he’s not intersex. He’s been tested. The tests show he’s a man. He looks like a man. What else do we need to realize he’s a man?

            Like

            Reply

              1. I’m very sorry for these Twitter accounts and others like them. But I’m even more sorry for what their dysfunction is doing to all of this. Let’s not give them any succor by driving traffic to them, OK? Let their conscience be their judge.

                Like

              2. I will say the following. When I read the news stories about the IBA disqualifying these athletes, I immediately noticed the russian name of the person making the statement about their biology and who he was making this statement to – TASS.

                Tell me honestly, when you read them, did you notice these things and decide that the russians were telling the truth in this case? They do sometimes – I won’t argue with a russian that the sky is blue, for example.

                Or did you not notice those details at all when you got the confirmation you wanted?

                Like

              2. “How can you call someone born with a vagina a “man”?“

                The issue is precisely that we (and that includes you) do not know that this person was born with a vagina.

                The problem is that the athlete in question seems to have XY chromosomes (as evidenced by genetic testing in 2023) while presenting as female. This person might have external female genitalia while having internal testicles and no uterus or ovaries. As this information is not available, most knowledgeable people will presume that this athlete suffers from DSD.

                The actual issue is fairness in women’s sport and the underlying question of the reality of biological sex. If you are in the Wokery, you dispute the former and deny the latter. However, if you believe in the objective reality of biological sex, the question becomes whether women’s lives should be put at risk in order to indulge an extreme ideology intent on erasing femaleness except as a social construct.

                Liked by 1 person

          3. I would kind of expect a disproportionate percentage of intersex people raised as female in very traditional countries to go into sports. Countries where sex roles are very strictly defined in society and women are valued for bearing children.

            You’re born with external genitalia that look female and are growing up as a girl. At puberty you start to appear more masculine and don’t get your period. That’s it – you’re worthless, a freak. You’re not going to get to form a family. It’s not like men will accept you either as one of them.

            Sport is one of the ways you can try to seek fulfillment.

            Like

            Reply

  12. A Russian blogger reported that both female boxers, who rose to the final in 2024 Olympic Games, are … not 100% female. Googled to check and it’s true:

    Who is Lin Yu‑ting? Taiwan’s Olympic boxer who failed a gender eligibility test

    Lin Yu-ting and Imane Khelif were disqualified at the 2023 World Championships after failing gender eligibility tests, but both are competing at the Paris Olympics

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a reply to mosckerr Cancel reply