DougC wrote:
This is the best explanation as to what's wrong with Semenya (and other self-described females who have high levels of testosterone).
No, that's a terrible article and a terrible example, written by a questionable person who wants to have men take over women's running events.
To see more of what public opinion is like, see the comments below this video on youtube. Public opinion is whole heartedly against men being in women's events.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9j-TJdJRmMThere has to be some distinction between what is a, "woman" and what is not.
The majority of these distinctions as per the IAAF are negative i.e. a woman is defined by the absence of levels of Testosterone, and other drugs. The absence of a Y chromosome etc.
The average woman has 2mmol/L of T. The average elite runner has 3. The IAAF limit is 10 - a dozen standard deviations from the mean. With this limit imposed, Semenya ran 2:04. Those limits were lifted, and she ran 1:55.
If any other athlete showed that improvement in 1 year, it would be obvious she is doping.
The *only* athletic advantage Semenya has is her extraordinarily high T levels. Even at 3x the T levels of her average competitor, she can only manage 2:04 - a marginal time at the world level.
She is a mediocre athlete even with a huge testosterone advantage over her competitors.
+1
Canadian DBag wrote:
There has to be some distinction between what is a, "woman" and what is not.
The majority of these distinctions as per the IAAF are negative i.e. a woman is defined by the absence of levels of Testosterone, and other drugs. The absence of a Y chromosome etc.
The average woman has 2mmol/L of T. The average elite runner has 3. The IAAF limit is 10 - a dozen standard deviations from the mean. With this limit imposed, Semenya ran 2:04. Those limits were lifted, and she ran 1:55.
If any other athlete showed that improvement in 1 year, it would be obvious she is doping.
The *only* athletic advantage Semenya has is her extraordinarily high T levels. Even at 3x the T levels of her average competitor, she can only manage 2:04 - a marginal time at the world level.
She is a mediocre athlete even with a huge testosterone advantage over her competitors.
Real Women Only please wrote:
One more LOL wrote:You slow. You finished 6th. My little cousin could beat you and he is a sophomore in high school.
This post is an example of the mentally ill misogynist males who want to destroy women's athletics because of their hatred of women, and because they get their rocks off by disparaging women, verbally on social media, physically by competing in women's running events, and by depriving women of our rightful opportunities.
This issue has nothing to do with fairness. If the playing field was fair, there would be no men competing with women, there would be only XX women in women's events, and there would not be anyone allowed to compete with women who had such high levels of testosterone.
The only reason people watch women's athletics to glimpse beautifully toned butts and legs. Caster is not my cup of tea, but the 800m still had some gorgeous ladies.
All the people who complain about intersex athletes are really just saying we should choose the women's final races based of attractiveness. Maybe they are right, but I see no reason to change from the current qualification system.
Definitely not Blankenship wrote:
Real Women Only please wrote:This post is an example of the mentally ill misogynist males who want to destroy women's athletics because of their hatred of women, and because they get their rocks off by disparaging women, verbally on social media, physically by competing in women's running events, and by depriving women of our rightful opportunities.
This issue has nothing to do with fairness. If the playing field was fair, there would be no men competing with women, there would be only XX women in women's events, and there would not be anyone allowed to compete with women who had such high levels of testosterone.
The only reason people watch women's athletics to glimpse beautifully toned butts and legs. Caster is not my cup of tea, but the 800m still had some gorgeous ladies.
All the people who complain about intersex athletes are really just saying we should choose the women's final races based of attractiveness. Maybe they are right, but I see no reason to change from the current qualification system.
I fear this is true. All the men outraged by Caster really just prefer the looks of the 'pretty' white girls. Sexism masked in the name of 'fairness'. I and many others won't stand for it.
Justice4caster wrote:
I fear this is true. All the men outraged by Caster really just prefer the looks of the 'pretty' white girls. Sexism masked in the name of 'fairness'. I and many others won't stand for it.
What about the women who think it wasn't fair? Are they sexist too?
Is it sexist to be concerned that after decades of fighting for the opportunity for women to compete at elite levels, non-intersex women will no longer be able to compete in women's events? Is it sexist to be concerned that we're now going to have two categories of sport: intersex and men's competitions, and we're rolling back progress to a time when we didn't provide women with an opportunity to compete in elite athletics?
The reality here is that you seem to care only about intersex women, and completely and totally disregard the concerns of every other women. You just seem to hate cisgender / non-intersex women.
What about the women? wrote:
Justice4caster wrote:I fear this is true. All the men outraged by Caster really just prefer the looks of the 'pretty' white girls. Sexism masked in the name of 'fairness'. I and many others won't stand for it.
What about the women who think it wasn't fair? Are they sexist too?
Is it sexist to be concerned that after decades of fighting for the opportunity for women to compete at elite levels, non-intersex women will no longer be able to compete in women's events? Is it sexist to be concerned that we're now going to have two categories of sport: intersex and men's competitions, and we're rolling back progress to a time when we didn't provide women with an opportunity to compete in elite athletics?
The reality here is that you seem to care only about intersex women, and completely and totally disregard the concerns of every other women. You just seem to hate cisgender / non-intersex women.
The entire concept of separating men's and women's sports is sexist. Women's sports are a flesh show, men's sports are for witnessing truly remarkable athletic feats. Women do not, as you put it, compete at the "elite level." Rudisha would beat Lynsey sharpe by over 100m.
Definitely not Blankenship wrote:
The entire concept of separating men's and women's sports is sexist. Women's sports are a flesh show, men's sports are for witnessing truly remarkable athletic feats. Women do not, as you put it, compete at the "elite level." Rudisha would beat Lynsey sharpe by over 100m.
Horseshoe theory in action. It's weird when regressive conservatives agree with extreme progressives but that's where we are on this issue.
I think there is tremendous value in providing opportunities for non-intersex women to participate in athletics. I want little girls all over the world to watch the olympics and say "One day, that might be me!" It's sad that in the name of "inclusion" we're now going to be excluding the vast vast majority of women.
I do run run run wrote:
This has nothing to do with equality and people's rights. It has everything to do with the reason why sports are categorized between men and women. It is not for the men. It's for the women. I feel bad for the vitriol people have used against Caster, however this should have never gotten to this point where it's still an issue. Competing in sports as a profession is nobody's right just as it isn't your right to get a job you applied for despite your qualifications. People have compared this to the fact that many athletes simply as physical specimens which put them in an elite class athletically. But that is not the concern here. Caster is an XXY individual with internal male testicles which produce high levels of testosterone. So stop getting off message that this is about race, discrimination, or someones right to compete.
I agree totally
Justice4caster wrote:
Definitely not Blankenship wrote:The only reason people watch women's athletics to glimpse beautifully toned butts and legs. Caster is not my cup of tea, but the 800m still had some gorgeous ladies.
All the people who complain about intersex athletes are really just saying we should choose the women's final races based of attractiveness. Maybe they are right, but I see no reason to change from the current qualification system.
I fear this is true. All the men outraged by Caster really just prefer the looks of the 'pretty' white girls. Sexism masked in the name of 'fairness'. I and many others won't stand for it.
You have completely missed the issue here. The men here are fighting for women's right to sport and you can't see it. Women have been fighting, and continue to fight for their right to compete on an equal basis with men. If we lump everyone in the same category having no rules to define the female category, there will be no category. If that is the case, the 3 women medalists would not even make the Olympics. We have to properly define the women's category. The great thing about Track, unlike baseball, hockey, and basketball is that the female and male divisions are watched equally and are paid similarly.
There were three women that had question marks beside their names before the 800m started. Surprisingly, those three came 1st, 2nd and 3rd. It had nothing to do with how they looked; it had to do with the knowledge that they were running with some distinct advantages.
BraveNewWorld wrote:
The great thing about Track, unlike baseball, hockey, and basketball is that the female and male divisions are watched equally and are paid similarly.
That is the single greatest reason why track is not popular. Because for some reason people think that a women running 3:57 in the 1500 is somehow equivalent to a man running 3:30.
Are you admitting that you don't want track to have the popularity of major sports?
Nope, Roger Daltry hitting the gym hard.....Tiny.Mistakes.at.UKAD.Oh.boy. wrote:
Ghastly.Mistakes.at.UKAD.Oh.my wrote:Remember…anabolic steroids are a placebo effect. They do not really work.
Here is the world record holder in the women's 800m at 1:53.28…set in 1983. It is the oldest women's world record.
Meet Jarmila Kratochvilova:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/01/11/22/300B77A900000578-0-image-m-27_1452549996865.jpgShe is still 2 seconds faster than Ms. Semenya.
Go Jarmila!!!
Do you think she looks like Steve Scott…the famous miler?
(I think she does look like Steve Scott.)
Roll Eyes wrote:
Yes, we do.
She was born with a vagina. End of story. There was no surgery. She also grew up in a little hut in the middle of nowhere, dirt poor. Don't think surgery to have their baby look pretty between her legs where ever an option for her parents.
The amount of ignorance and speculation on this thread is spectacular.
Get out of your mothers' basements, would you?
All of you are basing what a woman should look like on your western perception of what a woman should look like. Nyonsaba looks pretty typical for someone from the Central African region.
Not sure what tribe Wambui is from, but again, bears a striking resemblance to many East African woman.
In any case, totally ridiculous to compare the looks of any elite female athlete to the average woman. From the outside, all us average woman will look like something went wrong somewhere in our development when put next to someone like Simone Biles or any track and field athlete.
That's not evidence. That's your imagination. Evidence would be doctor's notes at time of birth, verified, witnesses' statements, again verified, physical examination showing no scar tissue, etc.. Your comments are merely what an egotistical, slightly obsessive fan of Semenya for whatever reason would like everyone to believe. You simply aren't plausible in any way, shape or form.
You seem to be so racist that you assume that no white person has ever met, let alone trained, raced and showered beside the many black athletes in all countries in t&f. Let me assure you that I have, and I have never met a woman in the women's changing rooms who remotely has a similar look to Wambui, Niyonsaba or Semenya.
Not only that, you are so racist that you fail to notice that the policy of promoting intersex athletes as juniors means that the only black athletes in the womens' 800m final were intersex. No intersex females at all were black. You don't care about what Semenya is doing for the motivation, hopes and aspirations of non-intersex black South African female athletes.
No one really cares how attractive or not Semenya, Wambui and Niyonsaba are. They are not particularly attractive people, when compared against the male or female norms of attractiveness, as they don't have particularly symmetrical features. All 3, when compared against male or female elite 800m athletes, look bulky and heavy. They have a poor power to weight ratio when compared to someone like Rudisha or someone like Bishop. There is a reason top athletes tend to be very lean - it improves the power to weight ratio and enables them to move fast and tire slowly. Semenya and Niyonsaba are particular outliers on the phenology of the typical elite athlete, Wambui is an outlier because Wambui has poor running form. Something has to compensate for their success, and that is running against women who have up to 10 times lower testosterone than them.
You want to talk about unfair? How about hundreds of years of black oppression in South Africa. How about that whites earn 4 times as much in Caster's region. And then when these women rise above their circumstance, the cisgender white women scream foul. They have every other advantage in life, I don't feel sorry for them. But there probably are enough prejudiced people to take Caster's gold away, which I'm sure you're very happy about.
Justice4caster wrote:
You want to talk about unfair? How about hundreds of years of black oppression in South Africa. How about that whites earn 4 times as much in Caster's region. And then when these women rise above their circumstance, the cisgender white women scream foul. They have every other advantage in life, I don't feel sorry for them. But there probably are enough prejudiced people to take Caster's gold away, which I'm sure you're very happy about.
I don't know who you are, but you should hire someone to argue your position because you're not very good at it.
Definitely not Blankenship wrote:
All the people who complain about intersex athletes are really just saying we should choose the women's final races based of attractiveness. Maybe they are right, but I see no reason to change from the current qualification system.
No, that is absolutely not correct.
What we want are for the women's events to be for real women only, i.e. women who are true XX non SRY women, who met all the normal characteristics of being a woman.
What we are complaining about is that the Y chromosome SRY gene males ran in the women's 800m and made a mockery of the race, because they have no business being in women's events.
What we want is to keep women's athletic events for real women only.
The men are welcome to run with the men, but not with the women.
Justice4caster wrote:
I fear this is true. All the men outraged by Caster really just prefer the looks of the 'pretty' white girls. Sexism masked in the name of 'fairness'. I and many others won't stand for it.
Aha, I figured that was you posting, and then answering your own post.
Again you use Racism to try and brutalize and demean the women by calling them pretty white girls.
All those terrible things you are saying, you should be directing at yourself.
What about the women? wrote:
What about the women who think it wasn't fair? Are they sexist too?
Is it sexist to be concerned that after decades of fighting for the opportunity for women to compete at elite levels, non-intersex women will no longer be able to compete in women's events? Is it sexist to be concerned that we're now going to have two categories of sport: intersex and men's competitions, and we're rolling back progress to a time when we didn't provide women with an opportunity to compete in elite athletics?
The reality here is that you seem to care only about intersex women, and completely and totally disregard the concerns of every other women. You just seem to hate cisgender / non-intersex women.
Definitely not Blankenship wrote:
Rudisha would beat Lynsey Sharpe by over 100m.
Lynsey Sharpe is a Woman, so you're not making a valid comparison.
Justice4caster wrote:
You want to talk about unfair? How about hundreds of years of black oppression in South Africa. How about that whites earn 4 times as much in Caster's region. And then when these women rise above their circumstance, the cisgender white women scream foul. They have every other advantage in life, I don't feel sorry for them. But there probably are enough prejudiced people to take Caster's gold away, which I'm sure you're very happy about.
Here is the real racist right here.
