If you care about women's sports and the Caster Semenya situation, you MUST read this article

higher hormones also up androgen receptors,

so complex.

what about high test. from polycystic ovaries,

so common nowaday

men r different than women, simples

as for daphne looks like hitting more than peptides now/given iaaf freedom to sauce

The author clearly thinks an arbitrary line is okay and can be the basis of asking someone to undergo surgery or chemically alter their body. I disagree. Why are we entitled to draw that arbitrary line? Are we saying she is not a female? If she is a female (which I don't think is in dispute) then could that not be another arbitrary line which would be equally just? The point is that the line matters.

Did you really read the article, then?

I literally used every single one of the analogies you've offered to explain why they're not relevant - we don't compete in categories of height in basketball, and muscle fiber type in sprinting, so these arguments are utterly irrelevant.

This is obviously a complex issue, and I totally respect that people will disagree with me, and Joanna, on the ultimate action needed. But this kind of argument and "whataboutery", is well, just stupid. And I literally, directly addressed this, and you've just offered it back as an argument. Maybe you could say that you disagree about the categorisation into male and female or weight classes not making a difference, but offering up the very same thing that was used as a counter-example...?

Ross

FirstPoster wrote:The author clearly thinks an arbitrary line is okay and can be the basis of asking someone to undergo surgery or chemically alter their body. I disagree. Why are we entitled to draw that arbitrary line? Are we saying she is not a female? If she is a female (which I don't think is in dispute) then could that not be another arbitrary line which would be equally just? The point is that the line matters.

I don't think that's the point at all. No one is requiring anyone to undergo surgery or chemically alter their body. It's a matter of having clear rules separating men's track and field from women's track and field. If someone chooses to undergo surgery or chemically alter their body to fit into the women's category that's their choice. Under the prior rules, Semenya could have chosen not to be a runner in women's track and field or to get treatment to fall within the rules for the women's category. That was her choice.

It's no different than saying that if you are not an amputee and you want to compete as a T44 sprinter in the paralympics someone is "asking you to undergo surgery." In fact, no one is asking anyone to do anything. It's simple a rule that establishes eligibility to compete in a category. No one is required to do anything if they don't want to be eligible in that category.

I disagree - I think that is the entire point. The rules are are what we make them. It is not analogous to your amputee example. That is a very clear (and visible) physical trait. You either have a limb or you do not. In the current situation, if we were to stop the analysis at that point, then she is a woman period end of story. But that is not what we are doing. We are debating whether or a woman who produces more T than other women is still allowed to compete as a woman. When we do that we will invariably pick a level as we did before. That level will be the product of some experts convening in a room somewhere deciding how much is too much. You might argue it does not matter. Whatever number they come with is okay because it is a "rule". I would argue that since there is no rule at the moment - and the last rule was deemed unfair enough to be lifted - that the issue warrants serious consideration before we arbitrarily pick another level. Your argument also ignores any consideration of a right to compete. In what other category or division do we require anyone to change themselves to be eligible? Before you answer amputee ... amputees have a right to compete as such as to able body athletes. Likewise, so do masters of a certain age, etc. There is no other area where someone does not have a right to compete as they are in at least one category. Now what if you were that person born into a state in which you could not compete anywhere? Would you have a different view?

I don't think that's the point at all. No one is requiring anyone to undergo surgery or chemically alter their body. It's a matter of having clear rules separating men's track and field from women's track and field. If someone chooses to undergo surgery or chemically alter their body to fit into the women's category that's their choice. Under the prior rules, Semenya could have chosen not to be a runner in women's track and field or to get treatment to fall within the rules for the women's category. That was her choice.

FirstPoster wrote:

In what other category or division do we require anyone to change themselves to be eligible? Before you answer amputee ... amputees have a right to compete as such as to able body athletes. Likewise, so do masters of a certain age, etc. There is no other area where someone does not have a right to compete as they are in at least one category. Now what if you were that person born into a state in which you could not compete anywhere? Would you have a different view?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think anyone can compete in the "Mens" category.

Ross Tucker wrote:

Did you really read the article, then?

Ross

Did you really need to ask?

dingle wrote:

[quote]FirstPoster wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think anyone can compete in the "Mens" category.

USATF 2016 COMPETITION RULES

...

RULE 147

MIXED COMPETITION

For all competitions held completely in the stadium, mixed events between male and

female participants shall not normally be permitted. However, authorization for such mixed

competition in field events and in races of 5000 meters or longer may be made for a

competition by the Chair or designee of the appropriate sport committee or council. For

mixed competitions conducted in Field Events, separate result cards shall be used and

results declared for each gender. For races, the gender of each athlete shall be shown in the

result.

NOTE: See Rule 320.8 for Masters exception.

Thanks.

That is interesting and it certainly makes the human rights case for intersex people much more compelling to me.

^^ THIS

FirstPoster wrote:

It is not analogous to your amputee example. That is a very clear (and visible) physical trait. You either have a limb or you do not. In the current situation, if we were to stop the analysis at that point

Having testicles is a clear physical trait, one which should immediately disqualify you from womens competetion. As should having Y chromosome. Another clear atribute.

Joke is on us! wrote:

FirstPoster wrote:

It is not analogous to your amputee example. That is a very clear (and visible) physical trait. You either have a limb or you do not. In the current situation, if we were to stop the analysis at that point

Having testicles is a clear physical trait, one which should immediately disqualify you from womens competetion. As should having Y chromosome. Another clear atribute.

Where does it say in the article she has testicles? I did an albeit imperfect word search on the article and could not find the word testicles. And where are the results of her chromosome test? It discusses chromosomes in general but not with regard to her results. It says she has elevated T. Then it goes on to say:

"The higher T levels of hyperandrogenic women cause virilization, and we can see this virilization in physical features that we normally associate with men. But masculine features, by themselves, should not be used to label a woman. There are a wide range of appearances, and many women with typical female T levels have some masculine features. But when obvious signs of virilization are combined with unusual athletic performance, then it is reasonable to conclude that the athlete is possibly hyperandrogenic. It is a very fine line between legitimate determination of a high-T athlete and stigmatism based on stereotyping. Unfortunately, the press and public often use the obvious physical characteristics of some intersex athletes for cruel purposes"

"Hyperandrogenism is one of the primary symptoms of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). In such cases, it presents with symptoms such as acne and seborrhea, is frequent in adolescent girls and is often associated with irregular menstrual cycles. In most instances, these symptoms are transient and reflect only the immaturity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis during the first years following menarche. Approximately three-quarters of patients with PCOS (by the diagnostic criteria of NIH/NICHD 1990) have evidence of hyperandrogenism, with free testosterone being the single most predictive marker with ~60% of patients demonstrating supranormal levels."

.

There was a general reference to the future of women's sport that included a discussion on the range of anatomical outcomes - but was speculative and not specific to Caster:

"There are a variety of intersex conditions or DSDs (differences of sexual development). The DSD that probably imparts the largest athletic advantage is called 5-alpha reductase deficiency or 5-ARD. Children born with 5-ARD have a Y chromosome, but have a deficiency in the enzyme that is used to convert testosterone to dihydrotestosterone or DHT. In turn, DHT is responsible for the development of external male genitalia, hence babies with 5-ARD are often assigned female gender at birth. After puberty, girls with 5-ARD have T in the low-normal male range, and hence have a huge athletic advantage over other women."

The fact that she has been classified as a woman for purposes of competing is not at controversy. That, by the way, precludes her from competing as a man. Remind me again what class of person has not category to fit into from birth in which they are eligible to compete without elective surgery or medication. I think this is the first of which I am aware (but would be super-curious if there were other examples out there).

Maria has been checked over numerous times and she is all woman. As for the morons accusing Jelimo of being a hermaphrodite does this look like one?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPw6Sooe3B4

Possibly the oldest runner! wrote:

Because 5 out of the 8 finalists in the 800 at the Rio Olympics could be transgender or "intergender."

Really? Which one of these women are "intergender"?

!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.jpg

1. What is the actual evidence that Niyonsaba and Wambui are hyperandrogenic? I'm with you on Semenya and maybe Wambui. But Niyonsaba is a svelte 5'5", 130 lbs. I've seen her up close and wouldn't look twice at her among group of small east African female athletes.

2. Have any of you ever been to Burundi? If you had, I suspect you would speak less rudely of Niyonsaba.

WC field looks feminine to me...

http://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/canada-s-melissa-bishop-wins-silver-in-women-s-800m-at-worlds-1.2538902

https://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2538905.1440847675

!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.jpg

https://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2538905.1440847675

!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.jpg