IOC President Thomas Bach said the “hate speech” directed at boxers Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting at the Paris Olympics is “totally unacceptable.”

“We will not take part in a politically motivated … cultural war,” Bach said at a news briefing Saturday at the midway point of the Paris Games, where he wanted to draw a line under days of global scrutiny about the female boxers’ gender.

    • Cephalotrocity
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      They were tested and found to violate the rules they agreed to which in my book means to compete unfairly.

        • Cephalotrocity
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          The rules stipulated in the contract. It was fair because they both agreed to them like everyone else does.

            • Cephalotrocity
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              They are in the link I provided which you’ve read so you should already know.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                The link where you claimed Appendix 6 showed the appeal process when it didn’t and haven’t shown where it would show the appeals process?

                Sounds like you don’t know either. Which makes me wonder why you think any test at all would invalidate it apart from just taking the league at their word. A league the IOC has found to be completely corrupt.

                • Cephalotrocity
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Oh, I know. I know the entire document is literally all the rules and that the appeals process is clearly specified in the bold text you literally pasted a photo of in here.

                  You clearly aren’t looking to argue in good faith or do the bare minimum of effort to verify information literally being spoonfed to you. Please: Do better.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    the appeals process is clearly specified in the bold text you literally pasted a photo of in here.

                    That was the appeals process regarding doping. Which you know. It has nothing to do with gender. If you don’t want me to call you dishonest, don’t be dishonest. Don’t accuse me of not arguing in good faith when you’re pretending the doping appeals process which applies specifically to charges of doping has anything to do with this.

                    You claim you know which rules they broke. Name them. Or is that more dishonesty?