In a January speech to Republican lawmakers, Trump again incorrectly referred to Khelif as a “male boxer,” appearing to cement his support of the Supreme Court’s expected ruling to uphold state-level bans on transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports.
Amid the controversy, Khelif has stayed mostly silent on the issue to, in her words, “protect” her peace. But now, she has a message for the politicians invoking her name: Leave me out of it.
“I’m not transgender. I’m a woman. I want to live my life… Please do not exploit me in your political agendas,” she said, speaking to CNN in her most wide-ranging interview to date.
Unfortunately, some individuals have differences of sexual development and can be unaware that they’re biologically the other sex even though they may not present that way. In terms of sports, this really only matters in women’s and girl’s sports.
Now, Khelif has emerged as an unwitting lightning rod in the culture wars shaping elite sports and likely to influence new International Olympic Committee (IOC) policies on women’s eligibility. Those rules could establish whether to reintroduce mandatory genetic testing – determining not only whether Khelif is eligible to compete in the 2028 Los Angeles Games, but also how athletes whose bodies fall outside narrow expectations of what it means to be a woman are pushed out altogether.
“Narrow expectations of what it means to be a woman” is a really offensive phrase. Either Khelif is biologically a woman, with a body carrying or intended to carry large gametes or Khelif is biologically a man, with a body carrying or intended to carry small gametes. There are only two biological choices here.
…athletes like Khelif who are not transgender – but whose bodies challenge narrow definitions of womanhood – are increasingly scrutinized, including athletes with differences of sex development, or DSD, other women perceived to be outside the mainstream.
That’s because it’s people with DSD may not be the sex they claim. In this case, it’s like that Khelif is biologically male.
DSD is a medical term used to describe variations in sex traits, including hormones, chromosomes and reproductive anatomy that occur before birth. Medical experts say these variations, often referred to as “intersex conditions” are a normal part of human biology, and that sex is not always as clear-cut as male or female.
No. An individual’s sex may be obscured by a DSD condition. Human biology, however, remains rigidly male or female because there is no third gamete.
She does have naturally high testosterone levels, which she said she has been reducing under medical supervision since well before the Paris Olympics, rejecting claims that her hormones have determined her success in boxing.
“I was born like this. Of course, I have hormonal differences. But I decrease my testosterone levels based on my doctor’s recommendations,” Khelif said.
“Boxing does not rely on the level of testosterone. Boxing relies on intelligence, on experience and on discipline,” she added.
This almost guarantees that Khalif is male. For a woman, very high testosterone would be around 200 ng/dL and would be cause for medical evaluation (because of things like PCOS or ovarian/adrenal tumors). For males, 300 ng/dL is considered very low, the clinical definition of hypogonadism (the testes producing far too little testosterone). It wouldn’t be abnormal to see males have testosterone in the 700-900 ng/dL range. So…a biological female would not need testosterone suppression.
While framed as a measure to ensure fairness in women’s sport, expert consensus – including the scientist who discovered the SRY gene, the marker that’s the basis of the test – says that such policies risk oversimplifying biology and would expose all women to invasive scrutiny, especially in the absence of a clear scientific agreement that traits like naturally higher testosterone, for example, offer a decisive advantage in elite sport.
Invasive scrutiny is a saliva swab test. There is huge scientific evidence that male traits are advantageous in almost all sports. This is a ridiculous, highly misleading paragraph in a ridiculous, highly misleading article. And absolutely typical of CNN on the issue.