That is not an unreasonable position, one also shared by many people on this site as well as outside. There are two problems when it comes to how that stance is wielded for policy making:
1) The distinction matters for mating and other proximate private acts between two consenting individuals, not for sports, not for pretty much anything in the real world (with some rare exceptions like selective service). Sports cares about performance and WA, however imperfectly, tries to define eligibility criteria based on neutralizing significant performance advantages across category subgroups (cis, trans, and intersex women), which is what this debate is about in the real world, not about testicular possession or lack thereof like the gamete supremacists here like to believe.
2) “Female” is not a policy panacea because sex is not binary. People here don’t like to hear it, but there is little disagreement on that among scientists and doctors. What the trans- and intersex-averse end up doing when pressed is to come up with an arbitrary line demarcating which phenotypical or genotypical set of traits land on which side of the line (and apologizing for or dismissing the very rare combinations that challenge their categorization), but those are just opinions, and there no consensus on such opinions, and nobody cares about that carefully crafted line in the real world.
Sex is binary, and it's only very recently that a subset of scientists and doctors have been led astray by faulty arguments carted into medicine and biology from academics pushing peudoscience in the name of social justice. Anomalies in sexual development and phenotype are not evidence of additional sexes or the existence of a sex spectrum. Similarly, people with Down Syndrome aren't a different species or an indicator that the number of human chromosomes exists on a spectrum.
Ok sweetie, you can have your opinion. Now go brush your teeth.
If sex is binary, and it is determined by gametes alone, do you think this person is a man?
She was assigned female at birth, even though doctors knew she had testes. Should she have been assigned "male" instead? Should the society treat her as a man?
Re "My testicles don't make me less of a woman": This is like when I see that Trump's quoted something. You always know it's not going to be the actual direct quote.
Unfortunately, in both cases it will be accurate. They don't hold back.
No. It's an absurd misconception that just because Trump speaks more brashly than most politicians, that this means what he's saying is more honest. The guy lies like a child. He uses techniques like speaking bluntly, saying "as you know ___", and saying "even the Democrats are admitting ___".
I don't think I've ever heard him say something that was completely honest. He either blatantly makes something up, or exaggerates/mischaracterizes something so wildly that it's the same as lying. Like when he says "I charged tariffs to China", he knows most people don't know how tariffs work and that they'll believe him that another country paid for our import taxes. Or when he says "the stock market is at a new record no one thought possible", he knows most voters don't realize the stock market's nearly always growing and 'setting records', and that stock market growth during his term wasn't anything unusual compared to previous presidents. Or when he regularly lied about the number of jobs created every month. Or when he took credit for things that had nothing to do with him, or that happened years before he took office.
If someone speaks confidently to you and says "I don't hold back, everyone else is politically correct, but I tell the most tremendous truth", for the love of God fact check them. Trump has literally no meaningful skills other than his ability to convincingly lie about his accomplishments, and to keep the Media focused on his character flaws so they won't focus on his lies and administrative incompetence.
This post was edited 47 seconds after it was posted.
If sex is binary, and it is determined by gametes alone, do you think this person is a man?
She was assigned female at birth, even though doctors knew she had testes. Should she have been assigned "male" instead? Should the society treat her as a man?
2) “Female” is not a policy panacea because sex is not binary. People here don’t like to hear it, but there is little disagreement on that among scientists and doctors.
You're clearly the same poster who anonymously posts on every gender thread because you're desperately trying to make 'gamete supremacists' a thing. It's not a thing. It will never be a thing.
Oh no, you found me. I must not be doing a good enough job of hiding my identity.
You have yourself in as many words said you believe what I previously defined as gamete supremacy. I don’t care whether you like it or not, or whether it’s a thing (whatever that means). It’s just shorthand to describe a very commonly position in this debate, and means exactly what it sounds like.
I can’t help it if you read shame or white supremacy into it. Basic English.
If sex is binary, and it is determined by gametes alone, do you think this person is a man?
She was assigned female at birth, even though doctors knew she had testes. Should she have been assigned "male" instead? Should the society treat her as a man?
A women’s global championship dominated by biologic males. If it continued unabated, it would basically spell the end of biologic females reaching professional levels in the protected events (400, 800, and 1500).
The only way that biologic females could hope to compete is through doping. The one female to beat Semenya using such means: Savinova, was given a four year ban and had her titles stripped, even though she had a fraction of the testosterone of Semenya, et al.
3 intersex women taking all the medals in an event could indeed make for a plausible argument of unfair advantage, but I haven’t yet seen a quantitative argument made as follows: the fraction of intersex women winning global medals relative to the total number of intersex women is much higher than the corresponding fraction for cis women (in 2016 or what time frame?). Or that the statistical likelihood of that happening by chance is say less than one in a trillion. All I see is cries of “that’s a man”! No math or science, just binary religion.
With the current WA rules, that fraction is 0 for trans and intersex women, and even the trans- and intersex-averse folks are celebrating because they also agree those folks have zero chance. That is quantifiably unfair to trans and intersex women, unfair by the same metric by which it may have been unfair to cis women back in 2016.
A women’s global championship dominated by biologic males. If it continued unabated, it would basically spell the end of biologic females reaching professional levels in the protected events (400, 800, and 1500).
The only way that biologic females could hope to compete is through doping. The one female to beat Semenya using such means: Savinova, was given a four year ban and had her titles stripped, even though she had a fraction of the testosterone of Semenya, et al.
3 intersex women taking all the medals in an event could indeed make for a plausible argument of unfair advantage, but I haven’t yet seen a quantitative argument made as follows: the fraction of intersex women winning global medals relative to the total number of intersex women is much higher than the corresponding fraction for cis women (in 2016 or what time frame?). Or that the statistical likelihood of that happening by chance is say less than one in a trillion. All I see is cries of “that’s a man”! No math or science, just binary religion.
With the current WA rules, that fraction is 0 for trans and intersex women, and even the trans- and intersex-averse folks are celebrating because they also agree those folks have zero chance. That is quantifiably unfair to trans and intersex women, unfair by the same metric by which it may have been unfair to cis women back in 2016.
She has XY chromosomes, was born with testes, and has no female sex organs. Yes, I think that makes her male. She does not look male because, per the article, her testes were removed at birth. Do I think she should be allowed to compete in women's professional track? Definitely not. Should she be allowed to live her life otherwise as a women if she prefers? Yes. I don't have a problem with males that lack external sex organs in women's locker rooms or other women's spaces. (I don't think transgender women with penis and/or external testicles should be in female spaces where there is nudity - eg locker room.) Sex IS binary, but she was essentially neutered surgically at birth. I feel sorry for her for having gone through that. But that has nothing to do with Semenya or any other XY athlete being unfairly allowed to compete in women's sports.
A women’s global championship dominated by biologic males. If it continued unabated, it would basically spell the end of biologic females reaching professional levels in the protected events (400, 800, and 1500).
The only way that biologic females could hope to compete is through doping. The one female to beat Semenya using such means: Savinova, was given a four year ban and had her titles stripped, even though she had a fraction of the testosterone of Semenya, et al.
3 intersex women taking all the medals in an event could indeed make for a plausible argument of unfair advantage, but I haven’t yet seen a quantitative argument made as follows: the fraction of intersex women winning global medals relative to the total number of intersex women is much higher than the corresponding fraction for cis women (in 2016 or what time frame?). Or that the statistical likelihood of that happening by chance is say less than one in a trillion. All I see is cries of “that’s a man”! No math or science, just binary religion.
With the current WA rules, that fraction is 0 for trans and intersex women, and even the trans- and intersex-averse folks are celebrating because they also agree those folks have zero chance. That is quantifiably unfair to trans and intersex women, unfair by the same metric by which it may have been unfair to cis women back in 2016.
It is likely that intersex individuals have won numerous titles at all levels of female sports in the past. It is less likely now, as the condition is generally treated when they are young.
She has XY chromosomes, was born with testes, and has no female sex organs. Yes, I think that makes her male. She does not look male because, per the article, her testes were removed at birth. Do I think she should be allowed to compete in women's professional track? Definitely not.
She would still look female even if her testes have not been removed. Her body does not respond to androgen so there is no way her body could masculinize. If she takes supplemental testosterone instead of estrogen, she would still look the same she does today. (I don't know which one she takes. Many women like her take testosterone.)
So what athletic advantage does she have? Should she be banned from women's sports even if she does not have any advantage?
It is likely that intersex individuals have won numerous titles at all levels of female sports in the past. It is less likely now, as the condition is generally treated when they are young.
Sex IS binary, but she was essentially neutered surgically at birth. I feel sorry for her for having gone through that. But that has nothing to do with Semenya or any other XY athlete being unfairly allowed to compete in women's sports.
Why do you feel the need to keep insisting that “sex IS binary” if you think “that has nothing to do with.. XY athlete .. allowed to compete in women’s sports”?
Go ahead and have it for yourself that sex is binary, then what? Sports is not about sexual activity. Very little except reproduction and sexual intimacy is.
Sex IS binary, but she was essentially neutered surgically at birth. I feel sorry for her for having gone through that. But that has nothing to do with Semenya or any other XY athlete being unfairly allowed to compete in women's sports.
Why do you feel the need to keep insisting that “sex IS binary” if you think “that has nothing to do with.. XY athlete .. allowed to compete in women’s sports”?
Go ahead and have it for yourself that sex is binary, then what? Sports is not about sexual activity. Very little except reproduction and sexual intimacy is.
I don't understand why you are conflating sexual activity with sex? Sports is categorized by sex for obvious reasons and in some edge cases categorical decisions have to be made. Sex is absolutely binary and Semenya or any other male should not compete against other females. However if she decides to live as a woman, that is totally fine. Ultimately feelings shouldn't decide how you compete - your sex should.
She has XY chromosomes, was born with testes, and has no female sex organs. Yes, I think that makes her male. She does not look male because, per the article, her testes were removed at birth. Do I think she should be allowed to compete in women's professional track? Definitely not.
She would still look female even if her testes have not been removed. Her body does not respond to androgen so there is no way her body could masculinize. If she takes supplemental testosterone instead of estrogen, she would still look the same she does today. (I don't know which one she takes. Many women like her take testosterone.)
So what athletic advantage does she have? Should she be banned from women's sports even if she does not have any advantage?
Yes, sports are categorized based on sex. Her sex is male based chromosomes and sexual organs, so she is de facto not allowed to participate. There are many males with disorders related to sex that might make them disadvantaged compared to females. However, it is unreasonable that we should individually evaluate every male athlete to see whether they are disadvantaged as compared to female athletes. On the whole, being female is a disadvantage when it comes to athletic competition, and we have categorized sports, and especially professional sports accordingly.
Veering from this straightforward approach to categorization results in situations like the 2016 women's 800 m.
The letsrun management putting Caster or related topics on here just so everyone gets their rocks off in a sea of ridicule and bigotry. I wonder if on this right wing channel which group of humans is hated more. Lots of people hate jews and antisemitism is on the rise, lots of people hate Palestinians, lots of people hate black people, lost of people hate gay people. I think this just the era of right wing hate. One thing you won't find on letsrun is love for the human race. letsrun is the fox news of track and field.
The letsrun management putting Caster or related topics on here just so everyone gets their rocks off in a sea of ridicule and bigotry. I wonder if on this right wing channel which group of humans is hated more. Lots of people hate jews and antisemitism is on the rise, lots of people hate Palestinians, lots of people hate black people, lost of people hate gay people. I think this just the era of right wing hate. One thing you won't find on letsrun is love for the human race. letsrun is the fox news of track and field.
Caster Semenya is a male. I don't think any of the posters here hate males. We just don't like the idea of males running in female races.
Why do you feel the need to keep insisting that “sex IS binary” if you think “that has nothing to do with.. XY athlete .. allowed to compete in women’s sports”?
Go ahead and have it for yourself that sex is binary, then what? Sports is not about sexual activity. Very little except reproduction and sexual intimacy is.
I don't understand why you are conflating sexual activity with sex? Sports is categorized by sex for obvious reasons and in some edge cases categorical decisions have to be made. Sex is absolutely binary and Semenya or any other male should not compete against other females. However if she decides to live as a woman, that is totally fine. Ultimately feelings shouldn't decide how you compete - your sex should.
It’s truly not obvious to me and some others here why you and others are conflating sex with sports. Sex is relevant for sexual activity. You haven’t said what else it is relevant for and why. Sports is about performance, not your visible sex organs, your karyotype, your gametes etc., all of which are relevant for reproduction, a sexual activity.
Are you perhaps confusing correlation with causation?
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.