Doing something that gets your org banned by a government that isn't even the one you're protesting seems not only ineffective but counterproductive to me.

Censorship laws in the UK are quite dystopian, but even in less authoritarian countries, this kind of action would result in serious consequences.

that equipment was being used to further a genocide against the Palestinian people.

[Citation needed]

Finding out part of fucking around.

Countries don't usually take kindly to people or organizations that break into military bases and vandalize equipment.

Tehran Times is completely untrustworthy in this context, they're - essentially a propaganda outlet for the islamist theocratic regime in Tehran. Given that they make such an absurd claim and that it hasn't been independently verified - this is likely false.

See link below regarding Tehran Times:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Times#cite_note-regime-1

No, no we did not. Actions by a state doesn't justify collectively dehumanising an entire population. Gazans didn't become inherently evil because Hamas did October 7, Chinese aren't inherently evil because of the Uighur Genocide, Russians aren't inherently evil because of the invasion of Ukraine...

where they are stuck picking up the tab for people who never contributed to the local economy and are now draining it of resources

Pensions in the EU are entirely different from how it works in the US. I don't know how it is there, but here it is the nation you worked in that coughs up the pension money. Additionally, from what I've heard from retirees who did move to Spain, they have to pay income tax on their pensions to the Spanish government which means that these people would actually be contributing to the state coffers similarly to someone who was working. So, in other words you have money coming in from abroad, being contributed in taxes and spent on goods & services locally, boosting the economy.

Besides, the people who can afford to move abroad for retirement usually are the wealthier sort, so not the burden you make it out to be.

Had a quick look at their statements. The IRGC claimed to target "IDF C4I, along with a military intelligence facility located in the Gav-Yam Technology Park".

The edge of the technology center area is 1.2km from the location of the missile strike, which seems to have been the main hospital building of the medical center. Whilst I don't know where in the tech center area the "intended" target is, this puts the hospital area as a whole at a distance of 900m-1.5km. This is within the CEP (circular error probable) for some of Iran's ballistic missiles, but at least from a cursory search they appear to have armaments with enough accuracy to not risk hitting the hospital when aiming at their supposed target and sufficient range to hit Israel.

Every European nation has to deal with waves of retirees leaving the work force. It's no excuse. The general solution is increasing retirement age & per capita productivity whilst cutting down on government spending in other areas unless they fancy debt financing. Different GDP strengths is exactly why it's a % goal rather than an absolute amount to keep things fair.

Duh. OP asked about the position world leaders hold on the topic, not The Entire History of Everything™. Hence, the latter was cut for brevity.

Here's the short version (yes, this is incomplete because even writing this is a small essay. If somebody feels like adding context please do so), to answer your question on the background to their statement & position. The position is fairly common outside Lemmy at least.

History, history, history... (very long story)

2022: Israel was working on normalizing relations with the Arab countries. Things are relatively peaceful in the ME, albeit pretty shit for Arabs in Gaza & WB, not a warzone though. This succeeding would have been a threat to the Iranian network of terrorist organizations (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, groups in Syria such as the IRGC).

Iran pushes forth October 7 to reignite tensions, training Hamas operatives & such.

Hamas attacks Israel on Oct. 7 kicking off the war - other Iranian proxy groups soon join in. Initially there is no direct conflict between Israel & Iran.

2024 april - IDF strikes the Iranian consulate in Syria to take senior officers in the Hezbollah chain of command and assassinates several others. Iran retaliates with missiles against with strikes against Israel proper.

After that, tit for tat strikes in increasing magnitude and escalations which have culminated in the current situation. No, it was not surprising, this conflict was always fundamentally between Israel & Iran and has been slowly escalating for a long time.

but if we need to protect women’s “fair” competition strongly for some reason, shouldn’t we also have leagues for all types of people?

I think you're being sarcastic here, but there is a trend in that direction, with paralympics and such. It all comes down to this. How is the protected class of athletes defined? If a space for female athletes is going to exist at all, there needs to be some definition, which inevitably is going to feel arbitrary to some. The one they've gone with excludes males and most intersex individuals - allowing a little wiggle room here for folks with XY who have no male testosterone production which medically speaking makes it into a "woman at birth with low androgens" competition since those people will usually have a female phenotype at birth.

In the case of Imane - it may speculatively (after now reading a little about the circumstances and the "leaked" results) be a case of XY intersex with some kind of androgen dysfunction, either through reduced production via enzyme deficiency or partial insensitivity to testo. Being from a less developed country it's quite possible that Imane wouldn't even be aware of such a condition until it came to light due to the testing, and even if it was noticed earlier by Algerian medical professionals it may have been hidden from the patient due to how controversial intersex individuals are in traditionally muslim countries. This was the case for a long time even in the west, some countries even into the 2000's - "in the best interest of the patient". Quite tragic really.

You can though - at least to the extent that we in empirical science usually refer to "proving" or "disproving" (or rather, indicate or contraindicate a hypothesis). In this case it'd be studies/metastudies on injuries in different kinds of matchups (which can either show a statistically significant difference or not) or in performance of different athletes.

The case you linked here is regarding football, not boxing, which simply makes it a question of performance rather than also safety (as it is with boxing or other combat sports). The key difference in judgement here is the same reason that there are weight classes - simply wouldn't be safe (or fair for that matter) to match up a 120kg vs a 60 kg athlete - the latter might literally get killed.

Performance wise, the most "fair" might be to sort athletes into leagues based on testosterone levels. It's already known that higher testosterone levels tend to correlate with higher performance, so rather than imposing an arbitrary limit where only the athletes in the "sweet spot" just below the limit get to excel, grade them into brackets based on that. Women's sports were established in the first place to give women a fair chance at competing, since male vs female competitions in the vast majority of cases end up very one sided.

Thing is, my time is limited. I don't have time to look into every single thing. No, this isn't some empiric process on my part. It comes down to judgement.

On the one hand there is a well established organization (and several others actually, I did do a cursory internet search) backed by an army medical professionals, which will get sued into oblivion by these athletes if they are egregiously wrong. What they're saying also happens to check out with my own knowledge on the topic and news that has circulated (both in regular papers and on occasion medical news).

On the other hand, there are a bunch of random internet strangers who, without citing any external sources say that the well established organization is wrong and lying.

So, which one would you be inclined to believe?

Again, feel free to drop in some material that you think disproves this, I would love to have a look!

Some countries permit people to have the gender on their birth certificate changed after transition, which unfortunately renders your suggestion moot. Also from the wording in the article I think the testing will be applied to male athletes also.

Testing for chromosomes in this day and age is also quite simple and rather cheap. The main issue really is how privacy is handled. Personally I wouldn't want to have to be subjected to a gene test for a job.

I'm not particularly familiar with the politics of sports, nor am I particularly interested - as such I won't comment on what their goals are. I am, however, very familiar with human biology and healthcare. 5 yrs of secondary + tertiary education familiar in addition to several years of work experience. You'll unfortunately have to take my word for that. I don't intend to dox myself with documentation.

With my outlook on the topic, it doesn't seem like a "crusade of bullshit and misinformation". Headline news, physiology and most importantly "data and medical evidence from an extensive range of sources and consulted widely with other sports and experts across the world" - as they claim. I don't have time to personally look into that (sucks to have a life amirite) but am inclined to trust that they care for the athletes and have done due diligence. If you (or anyone else for that matter!) has material that disputes the validity of their work do feel free to link it in a reply. I and others I'm sure would be interested in reading such material.

Thanks.

...from the article

... to ensure the safety of all participants and deliver a competitive level playing field for men and women.

...which has examined data and medical evidence from an extensive range of sources and consulted widely with other sports and experts across the world.

This decision reflects concerns over the safety and wellbeing of all boxers, including Imane Khelif, and aims to protect the mental and physical health of all participants...

...and another citation for good measure.

At least from what I've read previously, these rules changes are primarily related to incidents where female athletes have been severely injured when competing against mtf athletes - but it's long been a contentious issue. As is often the case, when rules are changed/implemented they end up being broad and catching others in the crossfire.

It's unfortunate that it's ended up being necessary. However, there are many professions where people can't work due to genetics or health (eyesight, cardiac issues etc.) and athletics in general is already a field highly affected by genetics. C'est la vie...

Generally because the differences in male and female biology mean that ftm athletes are coming in at a disadvantage and only risk end up being hurt themselves by male athletes who generally have them at a disadvantage. Mtf athletes however, due to the aspects of male physiology that remain, have a higher likelihood of having an advantage over female athletes and also posing a danger to the other athletes. This is generally why most womens categories were introduced in the first place (female physical disadvantage).

Especially in martial arts and combat sports like boxing, which are already inherently dangerous, the physical safety of the athletes and protecting them must come above more ephemeral goals such as inclusion in my view.

As it stands with current day medical technology, there are limits to how close a transitioning individual can be changed to resemble the opposing gender.

Given how deep the differences are physiologically between the sexes with things such as lyonization I'm not entirely sure that it will ever be possible to fully transition a person outside of weird and ethically questionable future tech such as vat-growing a genetically modified clone and somehow transferring the consciousness of the person.

That is simply incorrect. I suggest that you educate yourself further on the topic and refrain from making similarly uninformed statements on related topics in the future.

Here is the wikipedia page of all current members of knesset:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_twenty-fifth_Knesset

Going from the top of the list of current knesset members, we have Likud party members (the current ruling party).

No. 4 on the list is Amir Ohana, current speaker of the Knesset. He is the child of two moroccan jews, and also happens to be gay.

No. 7 Shlomo Karhi, minister of Communications, Tunisian heritage.

No. 8 David Bitan - born in Morocco.

Q.E.D, feel free to find more examples on your own, there are plenty.

Yep - a lot of westerners fail to understand that a majority of Israelis have middle-eastern or north-African ancestry, even if excluding the large arab Israeli demographic. Depicting the people of Israel as a monolith is a very crude oversimplification