The IOC's Controversial Language Mandate and Athlete Dissent

The controversial issue of males in women's sport has reared its head at the Paris Olympics. In this episode, the team discuss the case of two boxers who were disqualified after failing 'gender eligibility tests' by their international federation at last year's World Championships but, despite being biologically male, are competing in Paris. We discuss how this situation has arisen, including an explanation of the governance issues that led to their inclusion, and the biological factors that give rise to the Differences of Sex Development (DSDs) that are thought to be responsible for these two cases. We explain how significant male advantage is in sport, and why boxing, of all the sports, is one that should recognise male biology and its implications. Finally, we offer insight into the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) Principles of Fairness and Inclusion, contrasting this with other sports that regulate women's sport and exclude male advantage.

Show notes

Here's where you go to sign up for Patron, with a small monthly pledge, which then gives you access to our Discourse forum where other listeners share their thoughts and responses to these issues

• The IOC's Framework on Inclusion with the ten principles discussed in the show, including "Number 1: Inclusion", and "No Presumption of Advantage"
• The Scientific Paper that accompanied the IOC Framework above
• We (Ross) co-authored a scientific rebuttal to that paper, addressing some of the issues with the science and human rights
• Here is the IOC Guidance on language use in Paris, as raised by Gareth on the show
• The International Boxing Association Technical and Competition Rules, which include, at 4.2. Eligibility Guidelines for Gender.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.