Caster Semenya wife is pregnant..

What happened to human decency? wrote:

King Tiger wrote:

Determined female at birth*

*wrongly

She has an intersex condition, and in the place she was born (rural south africa) they obviously didn't know better.

She has internal testicles and XY chromosomes.

On the other hand she probably has external genitalia that looks more like a woman, or somewhere in between. We won't ever know. And would we want to know? I don't see her sporting a bulge in her pants.

So she is not a woman, but she is also not a man.

She is intersex.

And generally doctors will encourage such individuals to be raised as girls as it's easier - they can keep their true sex better hidden.

Of course she is free to self identify as whatever she wants. she is an adult.

However sports has only 2 categories: male and female and she is nether.

But if she impregnated her wife, then she is closer to a man, no?

And men should not compete with woman, as that's one of the definitions in sport.

This HRT ruling is stupid too.

In fact there is no real solution to this problem that will satisfy everyone

Ban her? ---> How is this fair?

Put her in men's category? ---> walks around naked in men's change room without a penis and testicles?

Put her in woman's category? ---> beats all the woman

Make an intersex category? ---> be embarrassed to be forced to identify as intersex

Take all money out of sport? --> then it doesn't matter who wins

Biology doesn't follow rules like we want sometimes...

"wrongly" wow, didn't realize that we had an actual doctor that oversees births at a credible hospital trolling around letsrun!

"she has internal testicles" you know this, how? From my knowledge there hasn't been any report on what Semenya has down there that's been released, but if I'm wrong, please link me. And don't link me to that horribly biased Australian news article.

I think people forget that she didn't willfully choose to identify as a female. She was assigned female at birth and raised that way and this is a completely different topic than transgender individuals competing with women.

appleswan. wrote:

King Tiger wrote:

"To a hammer every problem looks like a nail"

This is exactly why they try to convince us to accept definitions based on hormonal differences:

---They can easily measure it in blood tests

---They can alter it through HRT

BUT the differences in men vs. woman can't simply be reduced to hormonal differences.

For instance men and woman even have different muscle mass, heart rate, temperature, lung capacity, skeletal structure, ligament laxity, etc. And there is no way to change most of these.

Hell if dig up a skeleton of Australopithecus afarensis, do I do a hormone test to determine the sex??? Don't let these athletic commissions pull the wool over your eyes. They are just doing what is in their own interests and what is convenient for them.

What's your solution?

Intersex and trans people exist and they have a right to compete in competitions. Nobody has the right to tell them they have to take hormones to alter there bodies in order to compete.

If your solution is to say trans and intersex should compete with men you are defining womanhood, which is a sexist endeavour men have participated in for centuries.

Even if you find a way to decide who should be in women's events you must understand how humiliating it is for someone who considers herself a woman and known as a woman to her friends and family to compete in the men's?

King Tiger wrote:

appleswan. wrote:

What's your solution?

Intersex and trans people exist and they have a right to compete in competitions. Nobody has the right to tell them they have to take hormones to alter there bodies in order to compete.

If your solution is to say trans and intersex should compete with men you are defining womanhood, which is a sexist endeavour men have participated in for centuries.

Even if you find a way to decide who should be in women's events you must understand how humiliating it is for someone who considers herself a woman and known as a woman to her friends and family to compete in the men's?

My point is that it's a catch 22 situation. There is no solution that will satisfy everyone or be fair.

I agree telling somebody to go on HRT to compete is ridiculous, and anyway a whole life lived with high testosterone cannot be reversed by 6 month of HRT. For instance, she already has the skeletal structure of a man.

Basically the only thing the IAAF or whoever can do is say: right of admission reserved. We don't like you and these are our rules.

Armin Tamzarian wrote:

integral (e^x) wrote:

It still seems that your argument is, "She should be able to choose to compete against women because I like it better that way." You're looking at how she must feel and being sympathetic to her, but then acting like her feelings here are the only thing that matter. Other people she competes against are also worth considering. So again, why draw any line between men and women's sports if we are going to be arbitrary? It defeats the point of doing that.

Maybe another one you are saying is that, "She should compete against women because she wouldn't be successful against men." But most XY males aren't good enough either, so I don't get that one.

I never said either of those things.

1. She's not "choosing to compete against women." She is a woman. Women should run against women. It's crazy that you see that as controversial takes.

2. I never said she should compete against women because she can't compete against men. Someone suggested that she would be in the "changing room" with male athletes if she ran in the male division. I was pointing out that she, just like most males you mention, is not fast enough to run against males. But I am NOT saying that is why she should run against women,

She should run against women because she is a woman. That is the argument.

What happened to human decency? wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

The IAAF made the case that she is biologically a male and won the argument. She was identified as female at birth and grew up believing she was female, but that did not make it fair for her to be allowed to compete against women without testosterone suppression.

the IAAF DID NOT say she is biologically a male. What was decided was that women (all women) must be under a certain testosterone level to compete in the womens 400-mile races. Which is absolutely outrageous? Imagine being a biological woman from birth with no question about your sex/gender then being told "oh your testosterone is too high to compete in these events". What would you say then?

Again, this is essentially saying "Bolt's body is naturally much bigger and stronger than mine, so that's an unfair biological advantage!"

The IAAF is essentially policing women's bodies but on an international athletics scale

Armin Tamzarian wrote:

integral (e^x) wrote:

It still seems that your argument is, "She should be able to choose to compete against women because I like it better that way." You're looking at how she must feel and being sympathetic to her, but then acting like her feelings here are the only thing that matter. Other people she competes against are also worth considering. So again, why draw any line between men and women's sports if we are going to be arbitrary? It defeats the point of doing that.

Maybe another one you are saying is that, "She should compete against women because she wouldn't be successful against men." But most XY males aren't good enough either, so I don't get that one.

I never said either of those things.

1. She's not "choosing to compete against women." She is a woman. Women should run against women. It's crazy that you see that as controversial takes.

2. I never said she should compete against women because she can't compete against men. Someone suggested that she would be in the "changing room" with male athletes if she ran in the male division. I was pointing out that she, just like most males you mention, is not fast enough to run against males. But I am NOT saying that is why she should run against women,

She should run against women because she is a woman. That is the argument.

rojo wrote:

Castor pregnant too? wrote:

I wonder if Castor getting pregnant is in the cards at some point. Since she's a women, it must be crossing her mind, the biological clock is ticking!

and

sbeefyk2 wrote:

Depends on how you define father.

Is a father the one who provides the sperm? If so, then there is a 0% likelihood Caster is the father.

Is a father the one who raises the kid? If so, then there is a near 100% chance Caster is the father.

Caster can never give birth as she has no ovaries. 0% change of that. As to whetheer or not she provided the sperm, I think it's unlikely but I asked someone deeply involved in cases like this about an intersex athletes chances for becoming a parent. They said there was a zero percent chance they could carry a child as they have no ovaries. I asked if she could father a child with her internal testes. They said they didn't think say but put their confidence level at 90% that her internal testes wouldn't be producing viable sperm, not 100%.

I am Sam wrote:

What happened to human decency? wrote:

the IAAF DID NOT say she is biologically a male. What was decided was that women (all women) must be under a certain testosterone level to compete in the womens 400-mile races. Which is absolutely outrageous? Imagine being a biological woman from birth with no question about your sex/gender then being told "oh your testosterone is too high to compete in these events". What would you say then?

Again, this is essentially saying "Bolt's body is naturally much bigger and stronger than mine, so that's an unfair biological advantage!"

The IAAF is essentially policing women's bodies but on an international athletics scale

The IAAF was weak. They didn't want to ban him because he is biologically (but perhaps not in all physical respects, eg non descended testes) male...because they were s**t scared of the fallout and long legal wrangles.

So they chose an 'easy' option that is unfair to the rest of females that are biologically fair dinkum females in all respects and choose to stay female gender.

They have added to the mess instead of fixing it.

What happened to human decency? wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

The IAAF made the case that she is biologically a male and won the argument. She was identified as female at birth and grew up believing she was female, but that did not make it fair for her to be allowed to compete against women without testosterone suppression.

the IAAF DID NOT say she is biologically a male. What was decided was that women (all women) must be under a certain testosterone level to compete in the womens 400-mile races. Which is absolutely outrageous? Imagine being a biological woman from birth with no question about your sex/gender then being told "oh your testosterone is too high to compete in these events". What would you say then?

Again, this is essentially saying "Bolt's body is naturally much bigger and stronger than mine, so that's an unfair biological advantage!"

The IAAF is essentially policing women's bodies but on an international athletics scale

dullard wrote:

What happened to human decency? wrote:

the IAAF DID NOT say she is biologically a male. What was decided was that women (all women) must be under a certain testosterone level to compete in the womens 400-mile races. Which is absolutely outrageous? Imagine being a biological woman from birth with no question about your sex/gender then being told "oh your testosterone is too high to compete in these events". What would you say then?

Again, this is essentially saying "Bolt's body is naturally much bigger and stronger than mine, so that's an unfair biological advantage!"

The IAAF is essentially policing women's bodies but on an international athletics scale

This is completely false. The regulation that is preventing Semenya from competing doesn't affect all women but only applies to individuals who are intersex with XY chromosomes and are androgen sensitive. As Semenya has 5-ARD form of DSD (as revealed in the CAS transcript last year) she fits all of these criteria. ALL people with 5-ARD have internal testicles and XY chromosomes and are androgen sensitive.