I think comparing an advantage of being able to run faster, jump higher, see better is incredibly different to a physical advantage of being able to physically dominate another and in this case physically beat them .... pretty ridiculous comparison tbh
It's a complicated issue.
Should the Algerian boxer - a naturally-born female, with some generic traits that give her an advantage in a contact sport - not be allowed to compete at all?
And I understand that some people (not anyone on this forum, that I have seen) are stating she should be competing against men.
Well, wouldn't the same situation rear its ugly head - the only difference now is that the Algerian boxer would likely be the victim in that scenario?
The thing is, as well, is that the Algerian boxer could be the hardest striker women's boxing has ever seen - that, in itself, doesn't mean she is unbeatable.
It would be up to her opponent to use their speed/stamina/fitness/technique advantage to wear hear opponent down.
The Italian boxer just wasn't very good, to be honest.
But, as I said - it's a complex issue, and I definitely understand both sides of the argument.
We, as a sporting society, need to think about what the best way to go forward is - banning female athletes with genetic differences is not fair to them; having athletes without those differences have to face them is probably not fair, either.
I don't know what the answer is, but I'm glad I don't have to make that call.