
A Russian-dominated boxing authority made the claim that she "failed" an unspecified test in 2023. This boxing authority - which is arguably an arm of the Russian state - has been banned by the IOC:
https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/summer/boxing/boxing-paris-olympic-semifinal-aug-6-1.7287538 |
Musk has financial ties to the EU. He's a billionaire. He has ties to every continent. I hope France will find a way. Not that it matters. |
A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.
If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer. I trust science. |
There are sure to be jurisdictional questions, but if someone directed their speech into a country and caused an injury to a person in that country, then there is probably a good case for jurisdiction. As for extradition, we're not talking about a crime. It's a civil case. If Musk doesn't want to defend himself, that would be his choice. If she got a civil money judgment against either of them, enforcement would be the next question. With their far flung business interests, it seems like that there are assets in France that the judgment creditor could pursue. |
Is this an extraditable offense? I think it's just a monetary penalty, payable to the French state and Khelif. Frankly, Khelif will probably also go after Rowling in UK courts which has famously strict libel laws and Rowling is a UK citizen. |
That's .... not how science works. It can tell you whether a Y chromosome is present. That doesn't tell you that a person without a penis and who has been a female all her life is suddenly a man for purposes of international boxing competitions. |
If a man with male genitalia has an X chromosome, is he automatically female? |
It's not always that simple. Please educate yourself. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/issue/january-2017 |
Well even though I disagree with his speech I don’t think the US should ever extradite people for criminal charges in other countries related to constitutionally protected speech. It sets a very dangerous precedent that be weaponized against US citizens to silence them. I do not think France or any other country should be able to send my grandmother to jail for offensive Facebook comments. |
According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary. |
No one is extraditing Musk for speech. But he's probably going to have to pay some money to Khelif for hate-based libel. He's got to pay the Troll Toll. |
I was watching the news last night and it said that prosecution under this French hate speech law can include fines and up to 10 years in jail. |
I agreed up until your last paragraph. She was subjected to incredible vitriol and hate (including numerous death threats) from the left for her initial "non-strident" positions. This understandably radicalized her. Not because she "wanted to be popular". Because she was ostracized and threatened for expressing fairly tame opinions. The left's hate and oppression made her a terrorist, so to speak. |
International Boxing Association's president had previously said a test had shown she had XY chromosomes and therefore did not meet their eligibility criteria. |
I'm not an expert in French law. But I find it baffling how France can pursue charges against the 8 billion people who don't live in France simply for voicing an opinion. If the entire planet is liable for their thoughts, the rational response would be for all tech companies and platforms to isolate France and ensure that the French cannot use the internet. It doesn't work if Jacques in Paris can sue any rando in a different country for suggesting that maybe it's not fair for a person with unusual genes to beat the crap out of women for sport. And why pursue JK Rowling and not Susan in Des Moines who expressed a similar opinion? Are the French aware of what the rest of the planet said about their opening ceremony? Is everyone now liable for expressing a thought that differs from the prevailing opinions in Lyon? It makes no sense. |