Candidly, I’m not one for sporting events and never have been. Having said this, the political aura that engulfs quadrennial events like the World Cup, and as of late, the Olympics is deeply fascinating in that it acts as a check and balance for how much society has truly progressed. Thus, every four years, the Olympic torch is set alight, and so is the fervour within me.
Coming off the back of Qatar’s controversial hosting of the 2022 FIFA World Cup, the most notable transgression during the games was the proposed banning of alcohol. A ban that aligned with Qatar’s societal norms and legal customs as a majority Muslim country, but was justified as being imposed to prevent unnecessary drunken violence and rowdiness at sporting games. Nonetheless, it raked in endless Islamophobic attacks from predominantly Western audiences calling Qatar overly conservative, rebuking modernisation and forcing Islamic values on tourists.
All the while, the true skeleton in the closet — exploitation and systematic abuse of migrant workers — was met by the world’s blissful ignorance. With the exception of an Amnesty International report and commentary on social media, abhorrent human rights violations and working conditions failed to sustain global media outrage and nary a 60 Minutes documentary on behalf of the esteemed, virtuous Murdoch media.
So, what’s all this got to do with the Olympics?
I’m afraid that the oh-so-civilised West has its own set of skeletons in the closet, and mainstream media appear to be guarding the door.
When Italian boxer Angela Carini publicly said“I have never felt a punch like this” after being defeated by Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, these words were the catalyst for the onslaught of viciously conspiratorial claims that Khelif was biologically a man competing in women’s sport. Spearheaded by right-wing, conservative figures like JK Rowling and Elon Musk — both of whom were named in Khelif’s lawsuit against X — commentators interrogated Khelif’s womanhood, spreading defamatory lies about her biological sex under the guise of free speech, engendering claims that she possessed an “unfair advantage”.
Rather, Khelif’s participation and subsequent win was none other than a manifestation of her talent, passion, and rigour. Any distasteful attempts to discredit her win must be called out for what they are: racist.
A slew of left-wing media outlets was quick to defend Khelif, with standfirsts and headings that read “Imane Khelif is not transgender”, “Imane Khelif is a woman”, “boxing gender row”; framing the online attacks within the scope of unadulterated sexism and transphobia. It rings true that sexism has penetrated the women’s sporting world for decades and continues to do so, as does racism. Mainstream media outlets noticeably glossed over the intersection of race, gender and Orientalist stereotypes that so clearly played out in Khelif’s degradation.
Days after their match, Carini publicly apologised to Khelif, noting that “all this controversy makes [her] sad.” Somebody get me some tissues. Consequently, Carini was praised by the media as brave and kind, and the International Boxing Association also offered her a petite $100,000. Keep in mind, this is the sum being offered to Gold medallists— apparently we may have lost sight of the definition of a Gold medallist ever so slightly.
After Khelif progressed to a match with Hungarian boxer Anna Luca Hamori, Hamori further aggrandised the already racist attacks against her opponent by posting an image that depicted Khelif as a beast towering over a beautifully athletic, and conveniently white, woman. The portrayal of the white woman as a victim is no coincidence, as to this day, the white woman remains the embodiment of victimhood and femininity. Only she must be protected by any means necessary.
The aforementioned image not only strips Khelif of her humanity, but reeks of quintessential Orientalism. It upholds the propaganda that seeks to entrench the imagery of the barbaric, violent, animalistic Arab man in the public consciousness. This narrative is inextricably rooted in colonial histories, in which the colonisation of land is perpetuated by the colonisation of bodies, particularly those of people of colour. Juxtaposed with the calm, white woman being a victim of her circumstances, the image reinforces the colonial dichotomy of the civilised West, and the savage East.
Ostensibly, this image among the infinite attacks on Khelif is all in the name of “fairness” in women’s sports. Fairness has long morphed into an issue of the “unfair advantage”, manifesting itself in ruthless attacks on women of colour who do not fit the Western beauty standard. Athletes like Imane Khelif, Serena Williams and Lin Yu-Ting have been subject to non-consensual, crude debate about their hormones, chromosomes, athletic build and genitalia, essentially depriving them of bodily autonomy. The same cannot be said for white female athletes, for whom these controversies are few and far between. It boils down to an issue of gendered racism, where female athletes of colour do not fit Western beauty standards, and for that reason cannot possibly be women. This campaign was so incredulous that Khelif was essentially coerced into undergoing a “dramatic transformation”, hailed by Western media as nothing short of “INCREDIBLE”, in which she was seen in a floral dress, with makeup. Turns out that women do look different when they aren’t in boxing gear!
Ironically, the West purports to be the bastion of gender equality. Thus, the race to defend its ‘superior’ position in advocating for (white) women’s rights far supersedes the necessity to be staunchly anti-racist.
The fact is that Khelif is an Algerian woman, and any tangible discussion of her Maghrebi Arab identity was swiftly followed by mention of her conservative upbringing, emphasising that she grew up in a rural town where transitioning was illegal. To put it simply, they strived to disprove and eliminate the possibility of Imane being transgender and Algerian, painting these identities as mutually exclusive. Furthermore, the West simply could not capitulate to the notion of an Arab woman of such faculty: firstly, winning against a white woman, and secondly, being allowed to compete at all. After all, she is Muslim, but unveiled? She is Arab, but not subservient? She is a woman, but… she can’t be.
What they really mean to say is: Imane Khelif does not look like a white woman.
Orientalist rhetoric of this manner therefore validates the discussion and questioning of Khelif’s gender in the first place. This is nothing new, racism nourishes and perpetuates a culture of sexism, and vice versa. In Khelif’s case, what she experienced was the pernicious amalgamation of these interlocking oppressions.
As Audre Lord once proclaimed in Sister Outsider, “I cannot hide my anger to spare you guilt, nor hurt feelings, nor answering anger; for to do so insults and trivialises all our efforts.” Uniquely, these events, whether we like it or not, expose the deeply neglected cracks and potholes that we have yet to fill in the current zeitgeist.
