Caster also has 3 times the amount of testosterone in her system, she has no ovaries, no womb, has male testes, married to a woman. For the purposes of sport, This is a man. WAY too much advantage here to even be called a fair fight.
Caster also has 3 times the amount of testosterone in her system, she has no ovaries, no womb, has male testes, married to a woman. For the purposes of sport, This is a man. WAY too much advantage here to even be called a fair fight.
To those who didn't like my sister analogy before, and then went on to post how unfair it was to other female athletes in the race.
I don't disagree that there is an issue worthy of discussion. I just vehemently disagree with the abusive and intolerant way that this is discussed.
I'm sure Semenya is under no illusions that she presents issues to a sport where there are only two categories - male and female - when there are strong arguments for defining those categories tightly such that she doesn't truly fit into either. She's no doubt been dealing with some of these issues all her life.
My personal view is that we have to accept some anomalies in the world, and to "force" someone to publicly compete as an alternative gender to the one that they would normally be categorised as simply for sporting purposes is morally wrong.
If that means that we end up with medals given out and records established by people over whom there are legitimate reasons to assume that their performance advantages is down to abnormalities in their biology, then I for one am happy to accept that. I don't accept the "floodgates" argument that this changes women's athletics for evermore (the small fraction of women affected by these issues is tiny, it is just scaremongering to expect that they'll start flooding track & field events).
It's not liberalism to treat individuals humanely and respectfully, recognising the disabilities or abnormalities that they are having to deal with, its just compassionate humanity.
The way some of the posts read on here is like an extract from the X-Men films, with all the neo-nazi overtones that some of that implies.
larkimm wrote:
To those who didn't like my sister analogy before, and then went on to post how unfair it was to other female athletes in the race.
I don't disagree that there is an issue worthy of discussion. I just vehemently disagree with the abusive and intolerant way that this is discussed.
I'm sure Semenya is under no illusions that she presents issues to a sport where there are only two categories - male and female - when there are strong arguments for defining those categories tightly such that she doesn't truly fit into either. She's no doubt been dealing with some of these issues all her life.
My personal view is that we have to accept some anomalies in the world, and to "force" someone to publicly compete as an alternative gender to the one that they would normally be categorised as simply for sporting purposes is morally wrong.
If that means that we end up with medals given out and records established by people over whom there are legitimate reasons to assume that their performance advantages is down to abnormalities in their biology, then I for one am happy to accept that. I don't accept the "floodgates" argument that this changes women's athletics for evermore (the small fraction of women affected by these issues is tiny, it is just scaremongering to expect that they'll start flooding track & field events).
It's not liberalism to treat individuals humanely and respectfully, recognising the disabilities or abnormalities that they are having to deal with, its just compassionate humanity.
The way some of the posts read on here is like an extract from the X-Men films, with all the neo-nazi overtones that some of that implies.
+1 and then some.
Acl30 wrote:
Thanks for the sarcasm instead of answering my question. My point was genotypically he is a male. What do all males have in common? A Y chromosome, if he has one he is a male. Are there any males without a Y chromosome? No. He also has testes, so he has male gonads. The only thing about him that is female is his external genitalia, or phenotype. You should know that gonadal sex and sexual phenotypes in males and females are produced by separate developmental pathways, I would guess that he has a mutation on his x chromosome that allowed him to develop female external genitalia instead of male genitalia. Also a side note, he is married to a woman, so on top of having a male genotype, male gonads, his brain is also programmed like a males. So, back to my original point, if you were to remove a males external genitalia (penis) and raise him as a girl, should he be allowed to compete as a female, Even though he gentoypically is a male and has male gonads?
I should know? You should not attempt to teach me anything.
It has been posted here many times Semenya has Androgen Hyperinsensitivity syndrome. She is intersex. Not a man. Her body does not respond to testosterone like a man's does and she has developed more like a girl than a boy. Biological sex can be more of a continuum than you care to realise. With regards to gender she feels she is a woman and a lesbian, but sexuality has nothing to do with this. If you are trying to say girls who like girls are wired like blokes then the discussion stops here.
Scientifically speaking, sex is far more complex than X chromosome and Y chromosome. It is completely possible for people with a Y chromosome to bear children and has happened.
Please research on sex testing before getting back to us.
I do run run run wrote:
Caster also has 3 times the amount of testosterone in her system, she has no ovaries, no womb, has male testes, married to a woman. For the purposes of sport, This is a man. WAY too much advantage here to even be called a fair fight.
Men have on average 10x the testosterone that women have. So men have 3x the testosterone of Caster Semenya. What's more, Semenya's body is by definition resistant to testosterone so may not respond to it in the same way as women. Also the normal range for free T in women spans from 15-70ng/dl which shows some women will have over 4 times the T of others naturally.
So testosterone is not the best indicator either. It has to be determined on an individual basis whether an athlete can compete as a woman or not based on whether she has an unfair advantage over others, taking all things into account. Obviously, not having a uterus, 'looking masculine' and having a girlfriend or wife are not performance enhancing.
What I don't like is that Semenya and other in her position are not not subject to any scrutiny following the CAS ruling. I think we need to be able to have a well informed discussion about athletes like Semenya, not just dismiss the matter how CAS have done and all try to look the other way.
what the what wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EszpoGf2Nkw
Is this a joke? She actually has pecs-no tits. She's wearing a MENS singlet with no sports bra. This is f*cked for any WOman competing against her.[/quote]
Without wanting to continue your gross 'analysis' of Semenya:
http://images.supersport.com/2015/3/Caster-Semenya-Training-140114G300.jpgYes her body responds to testosterone. Why do you think her performance slowed when taking the female supplements? Just look at her composition, muscle density, even behavior. Much of thats due to testosterone. But yes its not all about that. Intersex is not a woman and in sport it needs to be 100% female for it to have any integrity. Women are the disadvantaged in this regard because those female functions do not serve performance whereas men dont have to fight their own mechanics as much. Caster doesnt have cycles, most of her body functions like a man.
All of that is beside the point anyway. Hermaphrodites are not women they are intersex. Socially they can choose to live how they want but when it comes to how you make a living professionally by exploiting this is BS. Again there was no reason to reverse the decision to have intersex athletes like Caster take female hormones in order to compete. But oh no she stopped being a world beater so she cried about it. Lol.
Acl30 wrote:
...
Scientifically speaking, sex is far more complex than X chromosome and Y chromosome. It is completely possible for people with a Y chromosome to bear children and has happened.
Please research on sex testing before getting back to us.
Thanks for sharing this. I didn't realize that it was possible (as a result of a specific gene mutation) for a XY individual to naturally develop female organs (and no male organs).
These is a 16 y.o. person in Switzerland, which has that.
Assuming that she is not handicapped, I wonder how she performs in sports...
Of course it responds to testosterone. Not what I said. It is insensitive, hence her condition in the first place.
It has to be determined on an individual basis whether an athlete has an unfair advantage above other accepted differences such as being taller than other athletes etc. Muscles aren't an advantage, many girls in the gym can get that big without drugs.
What constitutes 100% woman? Would you allow a sterile woman to compete? One with an undeveloped uterus? Or how about no visible breasts (like 90% of distance runners)?
Harrier41 wrote:
Socially they can choose to live how they want but when it comes to how you make a living professionally by exploiting this is BS.
You could also argue things the other way around and say that women are able to exploit the sex discrimination in sports despite competing at a level lower than many who are unable to make a living professionally from sports.
Cases like Semanya make you look at the way categories are organized in track and field. To try and resolve problems like these, there are 3 ways forward but these all have certain problems in themselves:
1. Introduce an intersex category so people like Semanya are able to compete fairly in their own category. Would this open up the way to having even more subcategories in T and F such as weight divisions etc?
2. Remove competition categories based on sex. Just let everyone compete together and may the best person win. People will argue that women are at a genetic disadvantage but pretty much everyone who does not win an event can argue that they have some sort of genetic disadvantage. For example, there are arguments that East Africans have genetic advantages over European origin populations when it comes to distance running.
3. Remove prize money completely and make the sport amateur again. You will have occasional rogue cases such as Semanya competing in the women's category but at least they will not be depriving anyone from making money or from making a living.
Which one would be best?
larkimm wrote:
I don't disagree that there is an issue worthy of discussion. I just vehemently disagree with the abusive and intolerant way that this is discussed. It's not liberalism to treat individuals humanely and respectfully, recognising the disabilities or abnormalities that they are having to deal with, its just compassionate humanity.
The way some of the posts read on here is like an extract from the X-Men films, with all the neo-nazi overtones that some of that implies.
No argument there. Although I will say that two people can read the same post on the internet and one see neo-nazi overtones and another see a passionate track fan
I'm sure Semenya is under no illusions that she presents issues to a sport where there are only two categories - male and female - when there are strong arguments for defining those categories tightly such that she doesn't truly fit into either. She's no doubt been dealing with some of these issues all her life.
She does fit into the male category.
My personal view is that we have to accept some anomalies in the world, and to "force" someone to publicly compete as an alternative gender to the one that they would normally be categorised as simply for sporting purposes is morally wrong.
We would be forcing her to compete as an alternative gender to the one she identifies with and was raised as. The one she would normally be categorized as is male as far as t&f is concerned.
If that means that we end up with medals given out and records established by people over whom there are legitimate reasons to assume that their performance advantages is down to abnormalities in their biology, then I for one am happy to accept that. I don't accept the "floodgates" argument that this changes women's athletics for evermore (the small fraction of women affected by these issues is tiny, it is just scaremongering to expect that they'll start flooding track & field events).
I don't buy the floodgates argument either, but even one Olympic race taken from deserving normal females is too many. The rules should reflect common sense. I am not willing, as you are, to throw away fair competition for all women so that we don't hurt the feelings of one woman. Even if it is just occasionally.
1 2 3 green wrote:
larkimm wrote:The way some of the posts read on here is like an extract from the X-Men films, with all the neo-nazi overtones that some of that implies.
No argument there. Although I will say that two people can read the same post on the internet and one see neo-nazi overtones and another see a passionate track fan
I'm sure Semenya is under no illusions that she presents issues to a sport where there are only two categories - male and female - when there are strong arguments for defining those categories tightly such that she doesn't truly fit into either. She's no doubt been dealing with some of these issues all her life.
She does fit into the male category.
I have to disagree with this. If that's the case, then she would be already in the male category. She may fit into your definition of the male category, but the whole issue is the fact that athletics recognises her as a woman and eligible to compete in the women's category. None of us really knows the medical details of the issues that Semenya has, though some of it does appear to be well reported. As with other themes around T&F, I'm happy if the local athletics federation, IAAF and IOC are happy.
And yes, I do agree with your other remark up to a point - I think on this board some of the comments by regular (and less regular) posters are driven by a passion for the sport. Sadly many others I fear are just driven by a desire to troll message boards, or perhaps actually does reflect individuals lacking in humanity, even if they do seem to like T&F for some reason.
equalizer wrote:
Cases like Semanya make you look at the way categories are organized in track and field. To try and resolve problems like these, there are 3 ways forward but these all have certain problems in themselves:
1. Introduce an intersex category so people like Semanya are able to compete fairly in their own category. Would this open up the way to having even more subcategories in T and F such as weight divisions etc?
2. Remove competition categories based on sex. Just let everyone compete together and may the best person win. People will argue that women are at a genetic disadvantage but pretty much everyone who does not win an event can argue that they have some sort of genetic disadvantage. For example, there are arguments that East Africans have genetic advantages over European origin populations when it comes to distance running.
3. Remove prize money completely and make the sport amateur again. You will have occasional rogue cases such as Semanya competing in the women's category but at least they will not be depriving anyone from making money or from making a living.
Which one would be best?
Or 4) Pick none of the three options above. Those are 3 pretty extreme solutions. You keep m/f categories as common sense suggests. You implement rules defining the categories based on the best available current information. You enforce those rules while continuing to gain knowledge on the subject. There is no scenario where you can please everyone.
You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Caster Semenya is in no way male. Do you think if she was that the doctors would have had such a difficult time trying to determine ones sex if it were plain and simple? Like I said to the other guy, do some research please before talking like an expert.
For the purposes of sport we have to be accurate about cases like this. Determine if the athlete has an unfair advantage over the others through tests and determine the magnitude of this advantage. Many athletes have genetic and physiological advantages over others that cannot be achieved through training, it is important for the sport to determine what is classed as unfair.
By putting a blanket over all you are no better than CAS that got us into this mess. Not to mention you can't name THE factor that determines what makes someone a woman (hint, there isn't one).
1 2 3 green wrote:
equalizer wrote:Cases like Semanya make you look at the way categories are organized in track and field. To try and resolve problems like these, there are 3 ways forward but these all have certain problems in themselves:
1. Introduce an intersex category so people like Semanya are able to compete fairly in their own category. Would this open up the way to having even more subcategories in T and F such as weight divisions etc?
2. Remove competition categories based on sex. Just let everyone compete together and may the best person win. People will argue that women are at a genetic disadvantage but pretty much everyone who does not win an event can argue that they have some sort of genetic disadvantage. For example, there are arguments that East Africans have genetic advantages over European origin populations when it comes to distance running.
3. Remove prize money completely and make the sport amateur again. You will have occasional rogue cases such as Semanya competing in the women's category but at least they will not be depriving anyone from making money or from making a living.
Which one would be best?
Or 4) Pick none of the three options above. Those are 3 pretty extreme solutions. You keep m/f categories as common sense suggests. You implement rules defining the categories based on the best available current information. You enforce those rules while continuing to gain knowledge on the subject. There is no scenario where you can please everyone.
Yes that is the best thing to do, of course. This is what the IAAF has to work on and present it to CAS as the best way to ensure all athletes have a fair and level playing ground.
However the part you are drastically underestimating is 'defining the categories'. Very complicated both scientifically and morally. The IAAF could not do anything to prove that Dutee Chand was not a woman, hence they lost the case and we are where we are.
I'm not saying her gender is clearly identifiable. I said she should fit into in the male category as far as t&f is concerned. How about we just call it female and open.
The overwhelming majority opinion is the line we have currently drawn defining categories is insufficient. It's easy to move the line, it's hard to back it up with current scientific evidence. As stated by others earlier there just is no feasible way to study the issue.
So right now the line is drawn at a pretty arbitrary point. It's going to be arbitrary no matter where we put it, so why don't we move it to some place that makes the most sense to the most people.
1 2 3 green wrote:
I'm not saying her gender is clearly identifiable. I said she should fit into in the male category as far as t&f is concerned. How about we just call it female and open.
The overwhelming majority opinion is the line we have currently drawn defining categories is insufficient. It's easy to move the line, it's hard to back it up with current scientific evidence. As stated by others earlier there just is no feasible way to study the issue.
So right now the line is drawn at a pretty arbitrary point. It's going to be arbitrary no matter where we put it, so why don't we move it to some place that makes the most sense to the most people.
Do you mean most relevant scientific/medical experts or most LR posters?
I'm just reading the CAS ruling report on Dutee Chand, which sounds pretty horrendous so far.
1 2 3 green wrote:
I'm not saying her gender is clearly identifiable. I said she should fit into in the male category as far as t&f is concerned. How about we just call it female and open.
The overwhelming majority opinion is the line we have currently drawn defining categories is insufficient. It's easy to move the line, it's hard to back it up with current scientific evidence. As stated by others earlier there just is no feasible way to study the issue.
So right now the line is drawn at a pretty arbitrary point. It's going to be arbitrary no matter where we put it, so why don't we move it to some place that makes the most sense to the most people.
She isn't male as far as track and field is concerned. She is clearly competing in the female category following assessment by IAAF and IOC.
The reasons that you as an individual believe make her ineligible to compete as a female do not ring true with others. It is an opinion. The line is always arbitrary, we literally choose it. Sex isn't clear cut.
Scientifically, with regards to sport specifically, there is no clear reason why Caster cannot compete in the female category.
I'm not representing my opinion here by saying she should or shouldn't, but there is no scientifically proven reason that females with androgen hyperinsensitivity syndrome cannot compete against other females.
The IAAF had ruled that she wasn't a biochemical female, and couldn't compete without T-desensitizing pharmaceuticals. The CAS ruling reversed this, but "as far as track and field (i.e. IAAF) is concerned", she is not a female unless undergoing medical treatment.
Metric Miler wrote:
She isn't male as far as track and field is concerned. She is clearly competing in the female category following assessment by IAAF and IOC.
The reasons that you as an individual believe make her ineligible to compete as a female do not ring true with others. It is an opinion. The line is always arbitrary, we literally choose it. Sex isn't clear cut.
Scientifically, with regards to sport specifically, there is no clear reason why Caster cannot compete in the female category.
I'm not representing my opinion here by saying she should or shouldn't, but there is no scientifically proven reason that females with androgen hyperinsensitivity syndrome cannot compete against other females.
When Rio come around, the whole world will realize how track and field became a big circus... once again!!!! at the end of the 400m, the 800m and maybe the 1500m.
To be fair, she might run in some type of paralympics game, not with the WOMEN!
It's so obvious she doesn't belong!
