J.R. wrote:
They should remove the person from competition when there is any question of gender.
Can you cite which IAAF rule says this?
Should people be removed from competition based on your opinion of whether they look like a male or should maybe something more legitimate in terms of testing take place?
Or maybe you're one of those types who wants to get off watching a public 'gender test' (ie her pulling her pants down for your viewing pleasure)?
nostime wrote:
Hell to the NO wrote:Oh, hold up. Where in Africa is it common to have women with muscular builds, deep voices and facial hair? Because I so don't see it with Janeth Jepkosgei, Mesret Defar, Linet Masai or Turnesh Dibaba.
Haha! It's funny because you're such a yutz, the only Africa you know about is the one represented in distance running. Oh well, at least you know something about Africa. More than the average American knows.
No, most Americans are familiar with the Africa that produces sprinters and extremely muscular people. Where the hell do you think all OUR sprinters originally came from? Yes, there's been several centuries of separation and genetic diversity has been created. But I don't see too many black women around here with a 5 o'clock shadow at 18 years old. Even the most athletic among them.
Ross Tucker wrote:
And I must make the point, she is female. It's not a question of whether she is male or female, but rather whether she is "entirely female", as I understand the criteria.
So Semenya is not trying to cheat, and she's not pulling a fast one herself. The gender testing problem, mentioned above, is the issue here.
Ross
http://www.sportsscientists.com
How can they let someone who's not "entirely female" compete in a female race? That's not fair to the other "all-female" athletes. This is a real sham/shame.
You're misreading the statement. The original quote is saying that they are not questioning whether she is part female but whether she is entirely (100%) female. The conclusion seems to be that she is entirely female and therefore able to compete.
KUFI wrote:
You're misreading the statement. The original quote is saying that they are not questioning whether she is part female but whether she is entirely (100%) female. The conclusion seems to be that she is entirely female and therefore able to compete.
You're misreading the statement. The tests that they are performing are not going to be completed in time for the race today so they have to let her run. So they have not made a conclusion yet.
runamile wrote:
Should people be removed from competition based on your opinion of whether they look like a male or should maybe something more legitimate in terms of testing take place
Don't be an idiot.
There is a history of real issues with this person not being considered female for competitive purposes.
The actual "Women" in the final should all jog together as soon as the event starts... run about 8 minute pace and wave to the fans.
J.R. wrote:
There is a history of real issues with this person not being considered female for competitive purposes.
Ok, what are these 'real issues'? Beyond people like you saying she looks like a man, what can you cite?
Read the links and the history.
J.R. wrote:
Read the links and the history.
You're an idiot.
J.R. wrote:
Read the links and the history.
I'm sure there is a possibility I'm missing something, but all the links and history I've seen talk about people 'suspecting' she is male or saying that she doesn't look 'female'.
I'm asking if you've got something more substantive than people's visual opinions.
Even if she has a Y chromosome it doesn't mean she is a man. She could have androgen insensitivity syndrome. If she has AIS then she should be able to compete with the females.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
if he/she was trying to hide anything don't you think he/she would shave his/her underarms first?
Not if it gives her an unfair advantage. To compete fairly with other women, you have to be "entirely female". If she is not, then she should compete with boys/men. Simple as that.
Um, yeah wrote:
I'm asking if you've got something more substantive than people's visual opinions.
If there was, then there wouldn't be a reason to test -her-. So, yeah, I'd say that any 'history' would just be speculation.
Doesn't the fact that she lowered her official PB so dramatically in recent weeks throw doubt on the theory that this is an entirely innocent mistake? She was obviously capable of running world class times already and her coach and the federation must have been aware of that so they can't say that this issue came as a surprise.
nawtyxes wrote:
ramolfelhi wrote:She is in.
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12993_5500703,00.htmlIm predicting a WR now. I mean if she ran 1.56 in her first serious race...1.53 sounds reasonable in the final if they hit the bell at 55.
Semenya will not run a WR. If Semenya runs a WR then the heat will really be on IAAF and South Africa to come clean. Semenya will be directed to just keep pace and kick at the end. 1:57.25
Doing better than this sexy bitch?
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=TMD&q=Jarmila+Kratochv%C3%ADlov%C3%A1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=F2iMSrDhAeWrjAe11oDlCw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1nawtyxes wrote:
Semenya will not run a WR. If Semenya runs a WR then the heat will really be on IAAF and South Africa to come clean. Semenya will be directed to just keep pace and kick at the end. 1:57.25
That is exactly what happened.
errr... wrote:
Doesn't the fact that she lowered her official PB so dramatically in recent weeks throw doubt on the theory that this is an entirely innocent mistake?
no