In ancient Greece, tests of strength, speed and skill captivated audiences in Olympia. Lost for centuries, the Olympic Games were reborn in 1896. Since this first ‘modern’ version of the original contest – when, in Athens, 241 athletes, from 14 nations, competed across 43 events at ‘games’– there have been thirty three such gatherings of sporting competitors from across the globe. Whilst the Olympics certainly mark the pinnacle of physical achievement, at the heart of these four-yearly competitions is fair sportsmanship; victory is important, but not at all costs.
The recently completed Olympic Games in Paris were a great success. Like London in 2012, Paris encapsulated much of the best of sporting excellence and entertainment. Gratifyingly, the British team’s triumphs confirmed that our United Kingdom is amongst the greatest sporting nations in the world. Few Britons personify this better than Katy Marchant, the female cyclist whose extraordinary performances in the velodrome won for her multiple medals.
The central Olympic ethos of fair competition was soundly endorsed and generally honoured in Paris. So, what a pity that two allegedly biologically male boxers were permitted to compete against women; in doing so they mark an existential threat to the reputation of women’s sport. The Algerian boxer Imane Khelif and Taiwanese Lin Yu-ting breezed past all their biologically female opponents to win each of their weight categories, despite the International Boxing Association – formerly the sport’s governing body – publicly stating that each athlete twice failed tests to determine their sex.
Biological sex is an incontrovertible fact, not something artfully chosen to gain advantage. Nor should this contentious matter be brushed aside to avoid political contumely. According to research completed by the biologist Dr Emma Hilton, the average man can punch 162 per cent harder than a woman. On which basis it is essential that women and men perform in separate contests so that the best of each sex can compete fairly. It is disgraceful that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) chose to allow these boxers to compete against females – despite knowing that both had previously been banned after failing tests that showed them to be male.
Sebastian Coe, the former British winner of back-to-back gold medals, who has been highly critical of the International Olympic Committee over this issue, is hoping to replace the outgoing President of the IOC, Thomas Bach, who failed to ensure these ‘biological men’ were banned from competing against women. Bach’s departure is as welcome as his stewardship was lamentable. Lord Coe would be a much-needed breath of fresh air.
Track and field athletics and cycling saw no such controversy in Paris, as these sports’ governing bodies established policies to ensure biological sex is recognised, with athletes only bring permitted to compete having passed testosterone tests. All sports should now follow this example and publish clear rules to protect the integrity of sport and the safety of female competitors.
The Olympics rightly promotes fiercely fair competition, but determined athletes must be protected from harm. In the case of women’s boxing in Paris, those with responsibility chose to sacrifice both fairness and safety.
Sebastian Coe’s perspective embodies the British sense of ‘fair play’ – an understanding that the spirit of sportsmanship demands a reciprocal regard between competitors and respect for sport itself – that’s what makes competing fairly, regardless of a contest’s outcome, sport’s greatest joy.
