The 2024 Summer Olympics, officially the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad and commonly referred to as Paris 2024, is an international multi-sport event taking place from July 24 to August 11, 2024, in France. The opening ceremony is scheduled for July 26. Paris is the host city, with events taking place across 16 additional cities throughout mainland France, along with a supplementary venue in Tahiti, French Polynesia.

On August 1, the women’s 66kg boxing event at Paris 2024 entered the round of 16. Controversy, long anticipated, unfolded almost immediately in the ring. Italian boxer Angela Carini chose to withdraw just 46 seconds into her bout against Algerian opponent Imane Khelif. This decision came after Carini was struck in a manner that dislodged her headgear twice. She then dropped to her knees and began crying, visibly shaken.

In another match, Taiwanese boxer Lin Yu-Ting faced Uzbekistan’s Turdibekova. Over four rounds, Lin demonstrated speed and precision, earning unanimous support from the judges and a decisive victory. However, both Lin Yu-Ting and Imane Khelif had previously failed gender eligibility tests administered by the International Boxing Association (IBA). Lin was found to have an unusually high presence of XY chromosomes, typically associated with male physiology.
Although they were disqualified from the 2023 World Boxing Championships for failing gender verification, both athletes were permitted to compete at the Olympic Games. This is because the IBA was barred from organizing Olympic boxing due to officiating scandals. Responsibility for Olympic boxing was transferred to the Paris 2024 Boxing Unit under the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which adheres to more flexible standards regarding gender eligibility.

Gender verification in sport, also known as sex testing, is applied when competitions are restricted to a single gender. This practice has been a recurrent issue in the Olympics and other international competitions. Historically, it has been used to prevent men from competing as women and to address concerns that certain women with intersex traits may possess unfair advantages. In recent years, it has become entangled in broader questions about how to accommodate transgender and intersex athletes in elite sport.

The testing process has been controversial not only among the public but also for the athletes themselves. South African runner Caster Semenya, a 2016 Olympic medalist, learned through media reports that her medical examinations were intended to assess her sex. Santhi Soundarajan, an Indian track and field athlete who won multiple international medals, was stripped of her Asian Games medal after failing a gender test and later attempted suicide. Many athletes perceive such testing as an affront to their identity and dignity. This raises a deeper ethical question: does gender verification truly promote fairness, or does it risk reinforcing stigma and causing harm?

Despite the existence of verification protocols, Paris 2024 has not enforced particularly stringent standards. As a result, both Khelif and Lin have been allowed to compete.

In its official statement, the IOC explained that the Paris 2024 Boxing Unit based its rules on those from Tokyo 2020 and Rio 2016, in order to avoid disrupting athlete preparation and to maintain consistency. However, the IOC’s own records confirm that both boxers failed gender eligibility evaluations the previous year. On August 2, the IOC expressed concern over the backlash faced by the athletes, stating that Khelif and Lin were not guilty of wrongdoing and were instead victims of abrupt and inconsistent decisions by the IBA.

Public opinion remains divided. Some defend the athletes, asserting that they meet the eligibility requirements and should be allowed to compete. However, a significant portion of the public opposes their participation. The feminist publication Reduxx offered additional evidence suggesting the athletes were unfairly targeted. According to Reduxx, both boxers may have conditions classified as Differences in Sex Development (DSD), in which a person’s anatomical sex characteristics do not align with their chromosomes. This, they argue, could explain why both failed the IBA’s tests.

To address these challenges, a number of reforms should be considered. First, policies must be equitable and transparent. Athletes’ self-identified gender should be respected, including for those outside the binary framework. At the same time, personal medical information must be kept private unless disclosure is explicitly authorized.

Second, individual rights must be protected. Athletes deserve privacy, autonomy, and protection from discrimination and harassment. Clear, well-communicated regulations are essential to ensure these rights are upheld.

Third, education and training are vital. Coaches, referees, and sports officials should be trained in gender equity to better understand and manage related issues. Athletes themselves should be educated about their rights and the relevant regulations governing gender in sport.

Fourth, medical and psychological support must be guaranteed. All athletes, especially women, should have access to appropriate healthcare services. Mental health support should also be readily available to help athletes cope with stress, scrutiny, and discrimination.

Fifth, structural reforms are needed to promote equal opportunity. Programs should be developed to expand access for women in sport, including more opportunities for competition, training, and financial support. Equality in facilities and resources between male and female athletes must also be ensured.

Sixth, open dialogue should be encouraged. Forums and conferences can provide opportunities for athletes, coaches, and administrators to engage in constructive discussion on gender and fairness. Open communication is key to developing inclusive and effective policies.

Finally, robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms must be in place. These should assess how gender policies are implemented and make adjustments when necessary to ensure fairness and inclusivity.

In my view, both the IBA and the IOC are responding to deeply complex and evolving questions in sport. While fairness in competition is a legitimate concern, it must be pursued alongside a strong commitment to inclusion, dignity, and human rights. The assumption that chromosome patterns or hormone levels alone determine athletic advantage is increasingly contested within the scientific and sporting communities. A binary understanding of sex does not reflect the lived experiences of many athletes, including those with intersex traits or those who are transgender. Rather than excluding individuals based on biological markers, sport governing bodies must invest in evidence-based, inclusive frameworks that account for the diversity of human bodies while preserving meaningful competition. Equity and inclusion are not opposing goals—they must be addressed together through nuanced, compassionate policy.