CHENNAI: When Algerian boxer Imane Khelif defeated Italy’s Angela Carini in a boxing match at the Paris 2024 Olympics, what should have been a straightforward victory was marred not only by Carini’s behaviour as a sore loser, but perhaps even more so by a frightening gender- and race-based backlash against Khelif online and in sections of the international press.
The backlash was fueled by transphobic public figures like the author JK Rowling, as well former US President Donald Trump and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. A rumour was spread that Khelif was either a cisman or a transwoman (when someone like Rowling says “man”, they conflate both), and should not have been permitted to be in the Olympics, which is a tournament with clear gender binaries. Sympathy was stoked for Carini, who cried in the ring, abandoned the match, and refused to shake Khelif’s hand— as is protocol — afterwards.
Khelif’s eligibility was not without controversy, as the International Boxing Association — an organisation that was permanently banned from the Olympics as of last year, due to governance issues — had eliminated her from participating in the 2023 world championships owing to the results of certain unspecified gender-related tests. Chinese boxer Lin Yu-Ting was also disqualified for the same reason. However, both passed tests set by the Olympics, and competed.
That isn’t enough for some, who have been spreading rumours about chromosomal variation, gender reassignment and much more — not even from a scientific perspective, but purely out of sexist and transphobic reasons. Emerging science now tells us that chromosomal variation is not uncommon, and these studies are ongoing alongside changing cultural discourse on gender variation as well. Specifically with regards to athletes, as the author Sohini Chattopadhyay writes: “sex testing in sport [is] a practice reserved exclusively for female competitors”. A relevant excerpt from her non-fiction book The Day I Became A Runner, made available online for free in light of this controversy, is an illuminating read.
People of colour in the West use the phrase “white women’s tears” to indicate the conscious or unconscious weaponisation of crying that women with racial privilege deploy in situations where they’re just not in the right. It’s not always performance: sometimes it’s incomprehension that something hasn’t gone their way, for a change. That’s what Carini’s outburst, and the outpouring of sympathy for her, brings to mind.
Carini now feels remorseful, reportedly saying: “I was angry because my Olympics had gone up in smoke. I don’t have anything against Khelif. Actually, if I were to meet her again I would embrace her.” Or maybe that’s just what she told the press, because she certainly could apologise if she wanted to.
Khelif, to her credit, has done much better. She has spoken out publicly about bullying, and is quoted as saying: “It can destroy people, it can kill people’s thoughts, spirit and mind. It can divide people. And because of that, I ask them to refrain from bullying.” All bullies hurt because they’re hurting — that’s old hat by now. Whether Khelif meant her opponent or she meant the legions of online attackers doesn’t matter; her graciousness is something all her detractors can learn from.