Note that the article confuses sex and gender such as here:
Even if the reports published by Ait Aoudia are authentic, however, the alleged findings have been misrepresented. If true, they would not conclusively prove that Khelif “is a man.” Instead, as Snopes explains here, they would highlight the reality that, from a scientific standpoint, gender is not actually as binary as some suggest it to be.
Gender is of course not binary, but sex is. The leaked findings show that Khelif is unambiguously male, and has the same condition as Caster Semenya, who is also unambigously male and has fathered several children.
Note that nobody is disputing the leaked findings, merely talking around them, such as saying that it was unethical to leak them. It may have been, but that doesn’t change the findings. The IOC itself confirmed that it was a DSD issue. Khelif has refused to take a simple, cheap, non-invasive test that would put the issue to rest, and has even attempted legal action over implementation of sex testing for women’s sports.
The screenshots shown in Ait Aoudia’s reporting are unverified. Snopes reached out to the doctors and hospitals associated with the alleged reports. They either did not respond or would not, as a matter of policy, confirm their authenticity or if Khelif was ever a patient of theirs. Ait Aoudia did not provide Snopes with any details of his source(s).
Is this not enough to stop you from going around claiming she’s a male?
Why would it? Note that nobody is saying that the leak is fake or edited. The silence is deafening, but also not the only evidence. There’s another undisputed leak the confirms the same:
And the IOC itself saying that it’s a DSD case:
In total, there are exactly zero people saying “Khelif is female based on medical records”, and several different people saying “Khelif is male based on medical records”, combined with the IOC stating that it’s a DSD issue, which means that Khelif is male. Khelif could remove all doubt with a simple, cheap, non-invasive sex test, so why hasn’t that happened?
The IOC did not state this, they just conflated DSD with transgender in the initial statement. Why do you keep saying the leaks are undisputed? Read my initial quote about Snopes trying to corroborate the claims and being unable to.
Khelif could remove all doubt with a simple, cheap, non-invasive sex test, so why hasn’t that happened?
What doubt is there exactly, you’re pretty convinced that they’re a male with nothing but conjecture, smoke and mirrors.
They corrected themselves after stating that it wasn’t a DSD case. If it wasn’t a DSD case, then why correct it? Why not say “it’s not a transgender case either”?
The leaks are undisputed in the sense that nobody is saying “these are fake/edited/whatever”. People are refusing to comment on them, which is why Snopes says that they’re uncorroborated. That’s a “no duh” though, of course they’re not going to comment on something that they might get sued over.
Her male chromosomes are actually confirmed by 3 tests - 2 ordered by the IBA and one independent one. The first two say:
2022 World Boxing Championship in Istanbul test:
“Result: In the interphase nucleus FISH analysis performed on cells obtained from your patient’s material, 100 interphase nuclei were examined with the Cytocell brand Prenatal Enumeration Probe Kit. An XY signal pattern was observed in all of them.”
2023 World Boxing Championship in New Delhi test:
Result Summary: “Abnormal”
Interpretation: “Chromosomal analysis reveals Male karyotype”. Note this is not merely the IBA saying this, but an NBA journalist who saw the actual tests.
After the two IBA tests were revealed, she got an independent test as confirmed by her trainer in an interview (French). The results were reviewed by a world-class endocrinologist. Same result: XY chromosomes, male testosterone levels. After learning of the results, she dropped her appeal of the IBA ruling, and with it her right to compete in most international boxing events and prize money she would have won in 2023. She then went on testosterone-lowering hormones to qualify for the Olympics, who don’t do chromosome tests. The trainer notes they had to give her treatment to make her biologically “comparable” to a woman in terms of hormone levels and musculature.
It’s also important to note that Khelif has never denied having XY chromosomes. Nor has anyone on her team nor from the IOC. Instead they always deflect by repeating, without medical evidence, that she’s “female”.
Another:
Imane’s coach has confirmed that after Imane received the news about her tests, she saw an endocrinologist at the Parisian University Hospital, Kremlin-Bicêtre.
"He confirmed that Imane is indeed a woman, despite her karyotype and her testosterone level. He said: ‘There is a problem with her hormones, with her chromosomes, but she is a woman.’ That’s all that mattered to us.
Notice that they won’t say “female”. Notice also that Khelif has refused to take a sex test, even though it would be simple, cheap, non-invasive, and put to rest all doubts. Why not?
This is exactly why organizations are instituting sex testing, so that we don’t have to have a silly culture war and can just focus on sports. Khelif is welcome to compete in women’s leagues after going through the same sex test that everyone else will go through as well.
We have the technology to turn any one of your cells into pluripotent stem cells, and then differentiate them into ovarian tissues and eggs.
therefore I propose that we get samples of male transphobes, grow eggs from them, therefore transing them by their definition, also we can make sperm from JKR so she can go fuck herself
Ovotesticular syndrome (also known as ovotesticular disorder or OT-DSD) is a rare congenital condition where an individual is born with both ovarian and testicular tissue. It is one of the rarest disorders of sex development (DSDs), with only 500 reported cases. Commonly, one or both gonads is an ovotestis containing both types of tissue. Although it is similar in some ways to mixed gonadal dysgenesis, the conditions can be distinguished histologically.
Physical symptoms:
Enlargement of one or both breasts in men (gynecomastia) (present in 75% of cases)
Small phallus midway in size between a clitoris and a penis
i saw this one but did not think it was relevant as none of the suffererers of this condition, male or female presenting, have (a pair of) ovaries. but people (plural) with ovaries (plural) can mean less than two each i suppose. seems a bit of a stretch though
Well yes, that’s how that works. Sex is defined around the the type of gametes your body is organized around producing. It doesn’t matter how you present.
Their point is that an intersex individual with XY gametes can develop ovaries. By jk’s definition that person is a woman. Which is wrong.
And that is the simplest of examples, before we ever get to more complicated genetics.
And THAT is only talking about gametes and chromosomes, which is distinct from the social construct of gender identity (all of the behavioral and psychological stuff which is potentially influenced by, but not solely defined by, those genetic things)
I agree that gender identity is separate, but as far as the biology goes, sex is defined by gametes, and determined by chromosomes. Various DSDs like Swyer/Klinefelter/etc are variations within a sex.
I never said otherwise. What is your point? We are discussing JK Rowling’s erroneous claim.
I think you should do some self reflection on why it’s so important to you that this conversation shift away from the OP towards everyone acknowledging your point the definition of biological sex. Nobody here ever disagreed with you on the meaning of the words in scientific contexts.
You were incorrect to state this, and why I clarified:
By jk’s definition that person is a woman. Which is wrong.
Some people want to define woman as something other than “adult female human”, but it’s incorrect to rely on a redefinition of the word to declare her wrong, when she wouldn’t agree with that redefinition in the first place.
TBH the meme in the OP is silly anyways, because it’s clear that she was talking about humans in this context, unlike the original “behold a man” reference. When talking about about humans, Rowling is entirely correct.
No. She’s very much wrong. Human men can be born with non-functional ovaries. Her statement is factually inaccurate. She didn’t say anything about gametes or chromosomes. She said “born with egg producing equipment, even faulty”. That is a VERY specific phrasing and she is wrong.
You are obviously just trying to force a conversation about term usage and insisting that the words we use for both gender and sex should only ever be considered under the sex-based definition.
Language changes constantly. It’s all made up, literally. Words mean what the populace uses them to mean.
Lastly, nobody in this thread is arguing the science. If you’re talking to me, talk to me instead of building a straw man that’s easy to feel superior to. I get that calling trans women women makes you uncomfortable. Get over it. Stop trying to shift the conversation to a framing that puts you on sturdier ground when it isn’t what people are talking about.
JK Rowling’s a TERF. She makes factually inaccurate statements (e.g. the tweet in the OP). That isn’t up for debate. It’s self evident. If you want to have a conversation about science deniers, do it somewhere else. Because nobody here is denying the science except Rowling.
Language changes and that’s great. It’s intellectually dishonest to rely on a redefinition that someone wouldn’t agree with to “prove” them wrong. You’re essentially saying “If I define equals as not equals, then your statement that 1 + 1 = 2 is clearly false, ha!”
Our language changing doesn’t affect the reality of biological sex, and relying on a redefinition of “woman” that isn’t based on biological sex to “prove” someone wrong that wouldn’t agree with that redefinition in the first place isn’t a serious argument. She’s clearly using the common definition as “adult female human” that most people still use.
No, that’s not clear at all and you’re the only one here who thinks she’s talking about chromosomes and gametes. YOU’RE doing that. She is a fucking TERF, has shown it repeatedly, and she doesn’t think trans people are real or have a right to exist. She won’t use preferred pronouns for someone who identified as a gender that doesn’t match their sex.
We’ve been using “man” and “woman” to talk about gender and sex for a long, long time. YOU don’t get to decide that only one half of that reality is valid and tell people “you can’t use ‘woman’ to talk about your gender. That’s reserved for sex now”
The core idea she’s presenting is wrong, (even in your interpretation) because biological sex is not binary. Computers are binary, biology rarely is.
There are biological males, biological females, and there are perfectly normal people who fit into ‘biologically neither’ (intersex people). Just because you have ovaries, does not make you female. Women typically have ovaries, but not always. Women typically have cells containing two X chromosomes, but not always. According to the current definition and overwhelming scientific consensus in the relevant fields, having neither of those things does not preclude you from being a female or a woman.
JKR seeks to rewrite terminology to exclude a significant swath of the population from the definition, not the other way around. From many, many statements and actions she’s taken, her primary drive to do this seems to be hatred and bigotry.
Sorry, but that’s simply incorrect. The overwhelming consensus in the field of biology is that sex is entirely defined by gametes and nothing else. Intersex people are either male or female with DSDs. Here’s a biologist stating the obvious
Across anisogamous species, the existence of two—and only two—sexes has been a settled matter in modern biology. […] Here I synthesize evolutionary and developmental evidence to demonstrate that sex is binary (i.e., there are only two sexes) in all anisogamous species and that males and females are defined universally by the type of gamete they have the biological function to produce—not by karyotypes, secondary sexual characteristics, or other correlates.
That’s the point of separating the idea of gender from sex. Gender captures the complex social aspects of sex, which remains binary and immutable.
And if you don’t like that guy, here’s a statement affirming the same signed by lots of people:
Your first reference is Colin M Wright, whom is a conservative anti-trans activist. Why would I believe him to be a good source? The second blog link is for a petition by two other anti-trans activists - Emma Hilton, a founding member of Sex Matters, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_Matters_(advocacy_group)) and Ms Jenny Whyte, NZ activist whom I can only find notable for denying her group had involvement with vandalizing a local MPs office with anti-trans graffiti… (Won’t bother linking it).
I don’t really understand how you can assert a binary system exists, when there are many individuals (between 0.018% to 1.7% depending on definition of intersex) that simply do not fit the binary definition, having a genotype that doesn’t match male XY or female XX. That’s not what a ‘binary’ is.
All intersex people with ovaries, according to JKR: women.
I suspect she’d actually be quite angry at the amount of male-presenting people (complete with penises) that she just affirmed are women.
Its almost like this is a complicated topic that can’t be boiled down to black and white by bigots.
i don’t think she’d care too much, honestly
remember, she had no problems calling Imane Khelif a man, despite her being a (possibly intersex) cis woman
Khelif is male with a DSD
Where’s the evidence of that?
There have been several leaks of medical results, here’s a Snopes article about one of them:
https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/11/20/imane-khelif-medical-records/
Note that the article confuses sex and gender such as here:
Gender is of course not binary, but sex is. The leaked findings show that Khelif is unambiguously male, and has the same condition as Caster Semenya, who is also unambigously male and has fathered several children.
Note that nobody is disputing the leaked findings, merely talking around them, such as saying that it was unethical to leak them. It may have been, but that doesn’t change the findings. The IOC itself confirmed that it was a DSD issue. Khelif has refused to take a simple, cheap, non-invasive test that would put the issue to rest, and has even attempted legal action over implementation of sex testing for women’s sports.
Is this not enough to stop you from going around claiming she’s a male?
Why would it? Note that nobody is saying that the leak is fake or edited. The silence is deafening, but also not the only evidence. There’s another undisputed leak the confirms the same:
And the IOC itself saying that it’s a DSD case:
In total, there are exactly zero people saying “Khelif is female based on medical records”, and several different people saying “Khelif is male based on medical records”, combined with the IOC stating that it’s a DSD issue, which means that Khelif is male. Khelif could remove all doubt with a simple, cheap, non-invasive sex test, so why hasn’t that happened?
The IOC did not state this, they just conflated DSD with transgender in the initial statement. Why do you keep saying the leaks are undisputed? Read my initial quote about Snopes trying to corroborate the claims and being unable to.
What doubt is there exactly, you’re pretty convinced that they’re a male with nothing but conjecture, smoke and mirrors.
They corrected themselves after stating that it wasn’t a DSD case. If it wasn’t a DSD case, then why correct it? Why not say “it’s not a transgender case either”?
The leaks are undisputed in the sense that nobody is saying “these are fake/edited/whatever”. People are refusing to comment on them, which is why Snopes says that they’re uncorroborated. That’s a “no duh” though, of course they’re not going to comment on something that they might get sued over.
Here’s a thread that goes over more evidence
An example:
Another:
Notice that they won’t say “female”. Notice also that Khelif has refused to take a sex test, even though it would be simple, cheap, non-invasive, and put to rest all doubts. Why not?
This is exactly why organizations are instituting sex testing, so that we don’t have to have a silly culture war and can just focus on sports. Khelif is welcome to compete in women’s leagues after going through the same sex test that everyone else will go through as well.
We have the technology to turn any one of your cells into pluripotent stem cells, and then differentiate them into ovarian tissues and eggs.
therefore I propose that we get samples of male transphobes, grow eggs from them, therefore transing them by their definition, also we can make sperm from JKR so she can go fuck herself
Pluribus is really doing some Baader-Meinhof shit to me with pluripotency, I swear
which type(s) of dsd causes someone to have ovaries and a penis?
It happens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovotesticular_syndrome
Ovotesticular syndrome (also known as ovotesticular disorder or OT-DSD) is a rare congenital condition where an individual is born with both ovarian and testicular tissue. It is one of the rarest disorders of sex development (DSDs), with only 500 reported cases. Commonly, one or both gonads is an ovotestis containing both types of tissue. Although it is similar in some ways to mixed gonadal dysgenesis, the conditions can be distinguished histologically.
Physical symptoms:
i saw this one but did not think it was relevant as none of the suffererers of this condition, male or female presenting, have (a pair of) ovaries. but people (plural) with ovaries (plural) can mean less than two each i suppose. seems a bit of a stretch though
That won’t end up with someone having “ovaries”. They’ll have a bit of non-functional tissue known as streak tissue.
Well yes, that’s how that works. Sex is defined around the the type of gametes your body is organized around producing. It doesn’t matter how you present.
Their point is that an intersex individual with XY gametes can develop ovaries. By jk’s definition that person is a woman. Which is wrong.
And that is the simplest of examples, before we ever get to more complicated genetics.
And THAT is only talking about gametes and chromosomes, which is distinct from the social construct of gender identity (all of the behavioral and psychological stuff which is potentially influenced by, but not solely defined by, those genetic things)
I agree that gender identity is separate, but as far as the biology goes, sex is defined by gametes, and determined by chromosomes. Various DSDs like Swyer/Klinefelter/etc are variations within a sex.
I never said otherwise. What is your point? We are discussing JK Rowling’s erroneous claim.
I think you should do some self reflection on why it’s so important to you that this conversation shift away from the OP towards everyone acknowledging your point the definition of biological sex. Nobody here ever disagreed with you on the meaning of the words in scientific contexts.
You were incorrect to state this, and why I clarified:
Some people want to define woman as something other than “adult female human”, but it’s incorrect to rely on a redefinition of the word to declare her wrong, when she wouldn’t agree with that redefinition in the first place.
TBH the meme in the OP is silly anyways, because it’s clear that she was talking about humans in this context, unlike the original “behold a man” reference. When talking about about humans, Rowling is entirely correct.
No. She’s very much wrong. Human men can be born with non-functional ovaries. Her statement is factually inaccurate. She didn’t say anything about gametes or chromosomes. She said “born with egg producing equipment, even faulty”. That is a VERY specific phrasing and she is wrong.
You are obviously just trying to force a conversation about term usage and insisting that the words we use for both gender and sex should only ever be considered under the sex-based definition.
Language changes constantly. It’s all made up, literally. Words mean what the populace uses them to mean.
Lastly, nobody in this thread is arguing the science. If you’re talking to me, talk to me instead of building a straw man that’s easy to feel superior to. I get that calling trans women women makes you uncomfortable. Get over it. Stop trying to shift the conversation to a framing that puts you on sturdier ground when it isn’t what people are talking about.
JK Rowling’s a TERF. She makes factually inaccurate statements (e.g. the tweet in the OP). That isn’t up for debate. It’s self evident. If you want to have a conversation about science deniers, do it somewhere else. Because nobody here is denying the science except Rowling.
Language changes and that’s great. It’s intellectually dishonest to rely on a redefinition that someone wouldn’t agree with to “prove” them wrong. You’re essentially saying “If I define equals as not equals, then your statement that 1 + 1 = 2 is clearly false, ha!”
Our language changing doesn’t affect the reality of biological sex, and relying on a redefinition of “woman” that isn’t based on biological sex to “prove” someone wrong that wouldn’t agree with that redefinition in the first place isn’t a serious argument. She’s clearly using the common definition as “adult female human” that most people still use.
No, that’s not clear at all and you’re the only one here who thinks she’s talking about chromosomes and gametes. YOU’RE doing that. She is a fucking TERF, has shown it repeatedly, and she doesn’t think trans people are real or have a right to exist. She won’t use preferred pronouns for someone who identified as a gender that doesn’t match their sex.
We’ve been using “man” and “woman” to talk about gender and sex for a long, long time. YOU don’t get to decide that only one half of that reality is valid and tell people “you can’t use ‘woman’ to talk about your gender. That’s reserved for sex now”
The core idea she’s presenting is wrong, (even in your interpretation) because biological sex is not binary. Computers are binary, biology rarely is.
There are biological males, biological females, and there are perfectly normal people who fit into ‘biologically neither’ (intersex people). Just because you have ovaries, does not make you female. Women typically have ovaries, but not always. Women typically have cells containing two X chromosomes, but not always. According to the current definition and overwhelming scientific consensus in the relevant fields, having neither of those things does not preclude you from being a female or a woman.
JKR seeks to rewrite terminology to exclude a significant swath of the population from the definition, not the other way around. From many, many statements and actions she’s taken, her primary drive to do this seems to be hatred and bigotry.
Sorry, but that’s simply incorrect. The overwhelming consensus in the field of biology is that sex is entirely defined by gametes and nothing else. Intersex people are either male or female with DSDs. Here’s a biologist stating the obvious
That’s the point of separating the idea of gender from sex. Gender captures the complex social aspects of sex, which remains binary and immutable.
And if you don’t like that guy, here’s a statement affirming the same signed by lots of people:
https://projectnettie.wordpress.com/
Your first reference is Colin M Wright, whom is a conservative anti-trans activist. Why would I believe him to be a good source? The second blog link is for a petition by two other anti-trans activists - Emma Hilton, a founding member of Sex Matters, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_Matters_(advocacy_group)) and Ms Jenny Whyte, NZ activist whom I can only find notable for denying her group had involvement with vandalizing a local MPs office with anti-trans graffiti… (Won’t bother linking it).
I don’t really understand how you can assert a binary system exists, when there are many individuals (between 0.018% to 1.7% depending on definition of intersex) that simply do not fit the binary definition, having a genotype that doesn’t match male XY or female XX. That’s not what a ‘binary’ is.
Several major biology publishers agree with me.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-why-human-sex-is-not-binary/
https://www.nature.com/articles/518288a
https://cen.acs.org/biological-chemistry/genomics/Scientists-reject-binary-view-human/102/i33
https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/medgen-2023-2039/html