The Dire Wolf and the Rights of Extinct Human Species

The Americans have announced that they have brought back to life a dire wolf that lived during the Ice Age. Or, more precisely, they have created a hybrid — a cross between a gray wolf and an ancient dire wolf.

This was made possible by two things. First, the genome of the dire wolf has been successfully determined from fossil material. And second, the general advancement of methods for modifying the DNA of living organisms.

The case is the first of its kind and particularly interesting because the animal species in question is not actually very closely related to the wolf. Instead, it belongs to an entirely different genus within the canine family. Thus, quite a lot of genetic modifications had to be made, and the resulting animals may not — or even likely will not — behave like the original dire wolves.

It remains to be seen what will happen to these hybrid animals in the future. Will they become free predators roaming the North American wilderness, or — as I rather suspect — exhibition pieces harnessed for profit in zoos or even in some kind of traveling shows? It will also be interesting to see whether this revival of the dire wolf will be followed by attempts to bring back other extinct creatures, like mammoths or thylacines.

One thing is certain, however: the creation of these animals will spark lively debate about the ethics of science. And there is little doubt that the most heated discussions will center around humanity’s own relatives.

After all, with the methods that have now been successfully used, it is possible — at least in theory — to also bring back extinct human species. Such as Neanderthals, Denisovans, or even Homo erectus.

If that were to happen, difficult questions would arise. For example, regarding whether they should be granted the same human and civil rights as everyone else.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Historical Merging of Human Groups
Number of Predators is Increasing in Russia
African female and Persian male ancestors

Everyone has the right

Yesterday's sports news was about an Algerian boxer’s victory over an Italian female boxer. This became news because the Algerian was found to be a man during the 2023 Women's World Championships.

For any reasonable person, it's obviously unethical to allow a man to box against a woman—it's more akin to permitting assault rather than competitive sport. Such a thing should not be allowed under any circumstances.

Yesterday, the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which had allowed the Algerian to compete against women, also commented on the matter. According to the IOC, "all athletes participating in the boxing tournament of the Olympic Games Paris 2024 comply with the competition’s eligibility and entry regulations, as well as all applicable medical regulations set by the Paris 2024 Boxing Unit."

Up to this point, this sounds good, but then comes the bombshell: the IOC's message continues, "as with previous Olympic boxing competitions, the gender and age of the athletes are based on their passport." Yes—dear readers—you read that correctly, the Algerian's presumed gender is based on passport information.

On the other hand, the text later mentions that according to protocols available on the International Boxing Association’s (IBA) website, "this decision"—that is, the Algerian’s suspension—"was initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO. The IBA Board only ratified it afterwards and only subsequently requested that a procedure to follow in similar cases in the future be established and reflected in the IBA Regulations. The minutes also say that the IBA should 'establish a clear procedure on gender testing.'"

In other words, the IOC emphasized that its own decision to allow the Algerian to compete in the women's category was not based on proper gender testing. Instead, it was based solely on the suspicion that the Algerian's suspension from the World Championships was without substantial grounds.

Therefore, it is at least ironic to read—still from the same statement—that the IOC "the IOC is committed to protecting the human rights of all athletes participating in the Olympic Games as per the Olympic Charter, the IOC Code of Ethics and the IOC Strategic Framework on Human Rights. The IOC is saddened by the abuse that the two athletes are currently receiving."

Based on this statement, the IOC seems—quite seriously—to consider it appropriate to allow the beating of women by an individual—possibly a man—whose gender is under serious suspicion. And to defer the investigation to some future time, by which point this individual—possibly a man—may have already assaulted up to five women with the support and consent of the IOC.

Finally, it must be said that as a result of the analysis I’ve written above, the woke-sounding opening sentence of the international statement seems downright grotesque and sexist. It states that "every person has the right to practise sport without discrimination."

I wonder what the Italian woman beaten by the Algerian thinks about this—and especially about her own rights?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Mistreatment of Women at the Olympics?
Women full of testosterone
"Woke" pushes American science academies to favor women in their membership selections