The events surrounding the Olympic Womens Boxing have certainly been a travesty.
But Angela Carini is not the victim. Neither is Imane Khelif the victim.
Rather the real victim is reason.
It began with images of Carini in tears, defeated. by "a man".
This understandably raised the indignation of some. There had, after all, been a number of incidents in recent years, of young women robbed of scholarships, of accolades, of opportunities, by biological men masquerading as women. There were incidents of serious harm being wrought on young women by considerably stronger, biological men.
And here were images, of Carini woman in tears, broken. What kind of person would not feel the protective instinct kick in?
And so they flooded social media with their outrage.
But the story, as presented wasn't entirely honest. The "Man" in question, was born with female genitalia, was raised as a female.
And so it wasn't long before the "other side" launched their own campaign. They attacked the first group, labeling them as transphobes, and mocking them for attacking the very person they were supposedly intent to protect, a "cis-woman".
But this wasn't entirely honest either, as it appears the individual in question has xy chromosomes.
And finally a third group entered the fray. Offering their sincere apology for leveling false accusations, for being insensitive and cruel to poor Khelif.
Except, I haven't noticed that any of those in this third group were part of the first group. And they, like the others willfully glossing over the complexity of the situation.
In reality all three of these messages are strategically identical:
1) They are built on a falsehood, wrapped around a small kernel of truth.
2) They are designed appeal to emotion.
3) They are designed to signal one's own position of moral superiority.
4) They are designed to shame "others" for their morally reprehensible behavior.
5) They are developed to garner clicks and likes (no doubt providing fiscal benefit to some few).
6) They are utterly devoid of reason.
Certainly, there are questions which need to be answered:
1. Was Carini actually at risk of serious harm? Or did she just have a bad day, get inside her own head, and fall apart?
2. Does Khelif have an unfair biologic/genetic advantage to the extent that others lives and safety are at risk?
3. Does the classification of "female" for purposes of sport need to be re-evaluated? (Sorry Matt Walsh, it appears you didn't manage to solve that conundrum entirely - or maybe you did, I have't actually watched it yet so...) There are a few obvious options: by genetic classification (XX vs XY), by hormone levels at time of contest enrollment, or by birth genitalia, for instance.
4. In each of the above cases there are outliers, anomalies. Any classification system we make has outliers (a tomato is a fruit in a vegetable salad. A platypus is a mammal, but lays eggs) How do these outliers need to be treated? Arbitrarily pick one group, recognizing somebody will have an unfair (dis)advantage? Create one or more "other" groups? (Perhaps this is a valid case for a "non-binary" distinction.)
But those questions are unlikely to be answered. Because emotion is so much more interesting (and profitable) than civil, reasoned, discourse.
Because pithy, mindless memes and pithy op-eds are so much more convenient to read (and produce) than thoughtful, well researched reports.
Because we would rather be "right" than correct.
And so we sacrifice reason, and the pursuit of truth on the alter of ego and pride.
May they rest in peace.
