Hand her the gold medal now - Caster Semenya complete ridiculous 50.76/1:58.46 double in span of 50 minutes

Semenya just jogs the 1500m until 300m to go and pulls away very easily. Semenya could have run quite a bit faster than 4:10. The 800m had a first 400m of 58.8, not 61, as was reported. The muscle definition and size difference is just absurd. No woman can compete against Semenya and have a chance to win at 800. At 400m, is 50.76 the limit or is a 47 or 48 on the way? At 800m, will we see a world record. I can think of no civil rights argument in Semenya's favor for competing as a woman as long as there is a gender distinction in the competition.

Metric Miler wrote:

By that post alone... wrote:

By that post alone you've just reaffirmed you're a complete idiot.

It's called sarcasm...

Haha, yeah right.

Metric Miler wrote:

the IAAF decided it is unfair for her to have this naturally high T and so neutered it essentially.

But it ain't "neutered" now wherein lies the problem.

Metric Miler wrote:

Interesting assessment. Ever heard that appearances are only skin deep? Please give your no holds barred, straight to the point, no PC bullsh*t macho assessment of this lady:

http://s.ndtvimg.com/images/content/2015/jul/806/dutee-chand.jpg

I have heard it, but in the case of Semenya and Chand it doesn't apply because it's more than skin deep and if you're too stupid not to have grasped that concept yet then I can't help you any further with a "no holds barred, straight to the point, no PC bullsh*t macho assessment" of either of these two.

By that post alone... wrote:

Metric Miler wrote:

It's called sarcasm...

Haha, yeah right.

No he's correct. He has redefined sarcasm to mean what he wants it to mean. In the post you're referring to he identifies as a sarcastic person and you're a bigot for not supporting him.

The Duck Test wrote:

Metric Miler wrote:

Interesting assessment. Ever heard that appearances are only skin deep? Please give your no holds barred, straight to the point, no PC bullsh*t macho assessment of this lady:

http://s.ndtvimg.com/images/content/2015/jul/806/dutee-chand.jpg

I have heard it, but in the case of Semenya and Chand it doesn't apply because it's more than skin deep and if you're too stupid not to have grasped that concept yet then I can't help you any further with a "no holds barred, straight to the point, no PC bullsh*t macho assessment" of either of these two.

No, no you feel you can tell whether someone should be able to compete based on how they look and act. What about that lady? Should she be allowed to compete with women?

The Duck Test wrote:

I can't help you any further with a "no holds barred, straight to the point, no PC bullsh*t macho assessment" of either of these two.

Might add too that I'm unable to do that as I'm a SNAG who's on the side of women competitors.

Metric Miler wrote:

No, no you feel you can tell whether someone should be able to compete based on how they look and act. What about that lady? Should she be allowed to compete with women?

No.

reality be damned wrote:

By that post alone... wrote:

Haha, yeah right.

No he's correct. He has redefined sarcasm to mean what he wants it to mean. In the post you're referring to he identifies as a sarcastic person and you're a bigot for not supporting him.

Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

The poster was being simplistic about this matter when I have previously been writing about it's complexity.

It's funny that you think that I believe Caster should be allowed to compete in the women's category.

Maybe you cannot compute discussion based on science rather than feelings and what you believe is 'right' or outward appearances.

Metric Miler wrote:

No, no you feel you can tell whether someone should be able to compete based on how they look and act. What about that lady? Should she be allowed to compete with women?

This is a thread about Semenya, start another one on Chand.

The Duck Test wrote:

Metric Miler wrote:

No, no you feel you can tell whether someone should be able to compete based on how they look and act. What about that lady? Should she be allowed to compete with women?

No.

Thanks for a straight answer. And explain why she should not compete with women when she passes your previous 'test'?

The Duck Test wrote:

The Duck Test

Does Semenya look like someone with male characteristics?

Does Semenya run like someone with male characteristics?

Does Semenya talk like someone with male characteristics?

Then Semenya is probably (is) someone with male characteristics.

And Semenya shouldn't be competing against women who don't.

Sorry if that hurts the sensitivities of some here.

I'm talking about this very accurate test BTW.

Metric Miler wrote:

Maybe you cannot compute discussion based on science

Kettle meet Pot.

Metric Miler wrote:

The Duck Test wrote:

No.

Thanks for a straight answer. And explain why she should not compete with women when she passes your previous 'test'?

No explanation needed based on the previous test as Chand doesn't pass the previous test.

Do your own research as to other reasons why "she should not compete with women" and as suggested start a new thread.

Liberals always come up with some singular individuals to try and force their views onto the others. They're incapable of thinking of the consequences for other groups or the public at large. Semenya and other men shamelessly exploit the system and don't give a rat's ass about real women who have invested their lives in the sport. Fortunately this loophole will obviously be closed in a few years. But only after dozens of elite women have lost medals, money and honors to third rate male athletes propped up by the feel good leftists.

Kettle meet Pot. wrote:

Metric Miler wrote:

Maybe you cannot compute discussion based on science

Kettle meet Pot.

Well, if you have been reading this thread, I have repeatedly said the issue is nothing to do with gender identity or 'looking masculine' or the ability to bear childer or the sexual preference of Semenya, all these ridiculous ideas put forward by posters that frankly cannot accept that a person like Semenya exists.

I have repeatedly stated that the issue is one of physiological performance and whether Semenya has a measurable advantage over other women that would be deemed unfair in the sense that an ordinary woman could not compete. There are other advantages some women have such as height in the high jump which are seen as fine.

Bear in mind also that there is no evidence that the extra natural testosterone in women with androgen hyperinsensitivity syndrome increases the performance of that athlete. They are insensitive to it by definition for a start (insensitive does not mean unreactive, someone made that error earlier).

90% of the posts have simply been personal attacks on Semenya for one reason or another. This is what I have an issue with. These are unnecessary and irrelevant to the real discussion. If you want to just insult the lady then make another thread entitled 'I don't like Caster Semenya'.

The Duck Test wrote:

Metric Miler wrote:

Thanks for a straight answer. And explain why she should not compete with women when she passes your previous 'test'?

No explanation needed based on the previous test as Chand doesn't pass the previous test.

Do your own research as to other reasons why "she should not compete with women" and as suggested start a new thread.

No I'm asking you, you said Chand should not compete in the female category. If Chand does not have male characteristics, act like a man, look like a man and satisfy other simplistic criteria you offered then she should be allowed to compete with other women surely?

Metric Miler wrote:

If Chand does not have male characteristics

Does he have a Y-chromosome?

Y = male characteristics wrote:

Does he have a Y-chromosome?

So it's ok for a man born with de la Chapelle syndrome to compete against woman? Thanks for clearing that up.