SEMENYA jogs 800m in 1:55

The Metric Moron wrote:

jeff tallon wrote:

he doesnt look any more male than kratochvilova

Actually, he does, but how a person "looks" is not the issue.

What he calls himself is of no consequence in this matter, and is not being debated.

The issue is that he is a male, and doesn't have the right to be in women's events.

Whose definition of male? Which one are you using? That's the whole point here. You think it is cut and dried and it's not.

Based on Caster's behaviours and decisions (I.e. speech, dress, marriage and sexual interest in women, not wanting female hormones treatments, not wanting testicles removed) I believe that Caster truely identifies as man and that those responsible for raising her made a mistake.

Caster also loves sports and at her age / ability level really she would be confined to all-comers meets.

Therefore what I think is sad is that she keeps up the facade of wanting to be called a "she" just so she can keep winning track meets. If it wasn't for this desire of hers, she would have moved on long ago and be a man. Not that she wouldn't still have issues in our binary gender world, but she wouldnt still be asking to be called a she.

dukeboss wrote:

Semenya is a freak of nature, born a woman

Semenya was born a man.

He is not a woman and will never be a woman.

dingle wrote:

Whose definition of male? Which one are you using? That's the whole point here. You think it is cut and dried and it's not.

The same biological definition as used by me in previous posts, and by many others on Letsrun, including Ross Tucker, who even disagrees with himself.

The definition that differentiates woman from men.

What people are in reality is what they are, not what they call themselves,

which may or might not be the same, though people can call themselves as they wish.

The joke is on us wrote:

I believe that Caster truely identifies as man and that those responsible for raising her made a mistake.

Therefore we should call him a man from now on, and not be disrespectful to him.

RossTucker wrote:

Now, for the purposes of sport, you can make a very good argument (one that I believe and agree with) that she should not be allowed to compete against other women in sport's events in the current state, because of a set of rules that exists to ensure fairness.

Note that this does not make her any less a woman, because that is a gender definition and one that she is entitled to choose, not you.

It's the gender issues that drives this whole charade. And Ross has bought into the notion that gender has nothing to do with sex. He even says you're enormously disrespectful if you bring up the subject of gender. At the same time he doesn't shy away from arguing that many intersex athletes "are identified as female early, and self-identify that way too".

Why doesn't Ross advocate that only XX chromosome females are allowed in the female sports category? That would be a much clearer scientific division than all kinds of guesswork about testosterone levels and insensitivities. The reason he doesn't support this is of course that it doesn't pander to the GENDER issue agenda that we find elsewhere in society. The intersex athletes have strong backing from the LGBT movement and that's why we have these problems now.

CAS does not rule by strict physical/scientific criteria either. They look to gender issues as well. They want the sports categories to reflect what's common in society. And they could probably get in trouble if they deviate too much from national law, human rights, etc. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. But it's extremely hypocritical of Ross and others to label people "enormously disrespectful" for discussing the political agenda that has brought us here.

To me, Caster is a first and foremost a man. Just look at his wedding photos. For this important occasion of his life he dresses like a man. Despite this I wouldn't normally mind calling him "her", but when he exploits the system by identifying as a woman when he suits him, it's time to call out the cheats.

Better disrespectful than hypocrite.

Mouse Speed wrote:

Rojo-- can you please read this thoughtful post and more heavily moderate the hateful and disgusting posts about Semenya.

I'm not going to delete something simply because it's ignorant. I don't think people should call Semenya an It or He but the whole point of free speech is to allow speech you don't agree with. Yes, we always delete racist terms but moderating is a no win situation.

Rato wrote:

Some good points, however if she is born with XX and a vagina then she is female and can compete here, end of story. Trying to artificially lower hormone levels to create a level playing field is a very slippery slope that we should not and have no right to go down. Should we start giving Bolt some neurotransmitter blockers to even up the 100m.

She's not XX. She's XY. So your argument doesn't work.

disrespectful and proud wrote:

Why doesn't Ross advocate that only XX chromosome females are allowed in the female sports category?

You raise an interesting point.

Can someone tell me why this has become so 'complex' of an issue? Why isn't it that simple?

Are there large numbers of people that aren't xx or xy?

What am I missing?

rojo wrote:

She's not XX. She's XY. So your argument doesn't work.

Well said, except your terminology is like saying:

"The mouse is not a mouse. The mouse is a bear."

Yes the mouse (bear which identifies as a mouse for competition purposes) is a

bear, so why not just call it a bear, which is what the bear is, a bear, not a mouse.

Good grief, this issue is clear, and any contention is ridiculous.

We could just say, "the bear identifies as a mouse, but is a bear not a mouse,

and therefore has to compete with the bears if it wishes to compete." The bear

can choose to compete or not compete with the bears, however it wishes to do,

but the bear cannot compete with the mice.

Metric Miler wrote:

Personal pronouns do not refer to physiological attributes such as internal testes. That is absurd beyond belief.

No snide uses of 'he' will change Semenya's self expression. I'd love to see one of you lot do that to her face.

Your stubbornness about personal pronouns is what is truly absurd. Accept that they are used to refer to both gender and sex. It, biologically, identifies as a she.

You are identifying yourself as moron.

Metric Miler wrote:

No snide uses of 'he' will change Semenya's self expression. I'd love to see one of you lot do that to her face.

How ironic.

What you mean to say is, "one of you lot do that to his face."

But you delete all kinds of threads, including innocuous threads about athlete performances.

If I went and started a thread right now, for example, saying "will Hadley race again?" it would be promptly deleted. Yet calling a human being "it," speculation about genitals, slurs, etc. are okay in these threads.

You censor all kinds of speech you don't agree with. You are allowing the discourse in this thread because you condone it, not because you advocate radical free speech.

Just own it.

I totally agree. The CAS decision is ridiculously unfair to the overwhelming majority (99%) of potential competitors in women's athletics who are XX. NBC might have been able to gloss over the issue if Caster Semenya was only participating in the 800. But the decision to double in the 400, and potentially take a gold medal from superstar Allyson Felix, will force the network to cover it.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32806424/ns/health-health_care/t/raised-female-genes-say-xy/

Can I congratulate Ross Tucker's valiant attempts to enlighten this debate in the face of people who clearly don't have the faintest idea of the issues. Some of the attitudes expressed here are only likely to harden the resolve of the powers that be to retain the current position.

Pugsley wrote:

Yet calling a human being "it," speculation about genitals, slurs, etc. are okay in these threads.

You censor all kinds of speech you don't agree with. You are allowing the discourse in this thread because you condone it, not because you advocate radical free speech.

Yet you are one of those who is slurring all women, by promoting for a man to compete in women's competition, you object to having your own obnoxious ideas and speech censored, speech which is degrading to women all over the world, yet you want to have the truth censored.

Basically this issue is between hypocrites, who wish to call a man a woman for competition purposes, and people of truth, who are standing up for women, and who say he is welcome to compete against men, but not against women, because he is not a biological woman.

Stunned, but not totally wrote:

I watched this race and I suppose I have seen Castor race in quite a while. I was immediately stunned by the remarkable male characteristics she displays. Even Maria Mutola wasn't that masculine looking. How she passed muster on testosterone levels surprises me.

re: "How she passed muster on testosterone levels surprises me."

She didn't, with new CAS rule, testosterone level is no longer relevant. Prior to CAS, when Caster was forced to take hormone therapy, she was running 2:01 at best.

I am not a fan of self-identification. I much more prefer biological identification. And when someone like Caster purposefully chooses to celebritize her identity, she loses a great deal of privacy and instead becomes a magnet for public scrutiny, just like any other celebrity.

In comparison with the average female world-class 800 meter racer, Caster is enjoying ginormous daily doses of testosterone (steroid hormone), which allows her to jog 800 meters in 1:55.

I am now leaning toward advocating that the biologically disadvantaged, e.g., hermaphrodites, transgenders, be allowed to participate in the Special Olympics and other Special Olympic events, and not against biological females. They can enjoy racing in their own specific division.