Caster Semenya loses her appeal . Won’t be able to compete in Tokyo w/o suppressing testosterone

Sucks for her but very good for women's track. Unfortunately for Caster, due to her genetics, she is not good enough to compete with men but clearly should not be allowed to compete with women, and there aren't enough intersex people to have their own category, so she gets screwed but that is better than having the entirety of female runners get screwed by having to race against a handful of people they pretty much have no chance of beating. It completely makes sense that she should be required to take testosterone reducing drugs in order to compete fairly against women, but it also makes sense she wouldn't want to do that.

smdh wrote:

she should be required to take testosterone reducing drugs in order to compete fairly against women, but it also makes sense she wouldn't want to do that.

Manipulation of "her" testosterone should make no difference. To reduce her testosterone is destructive doping.

WADA is offensive in claiming they could reasonably interfere with athletes' bodies to fit their pettifogging rules. Medical science is not reliable enough to prescribe the suppression of hormones.

Semenya is genetically and irremediably a male in each and every cell. He can compete with men and beat the vast majority of them. He has been close to 1:50 and crush nearly all college males.

I said nothing of the kind. Where did I say that my views changed because the rules were changed? I formed my views independently of any decision by the IAAF and the Swiss Appeal Court. I agree with their decision but I didn't form my views on what they decided. That doesn't deny the validity of those who have changed their views because they have been persuaded by the arguments. No one is required to hold the same view their entire life. Indeed, it would show an inability to learn and grow.

Your analogy of segregation laws is false. Societies change their laws when they believe laws should change. So it was with ending segregation. Individuals can and will hold views that are different from what society chooses to do. Some opposed ending segregation. I have never endorsed segregation and always supported its abolition.

Women have fought hard to achieve equal rights and treatment in many areas - and they continue to do so - but few see that means defending Semenya.

If we all zoom out and take a look at this, it's all very silly.

Semenya is a woman, who should get to run against women.

Those arguing against that inevitably say that female runners are being treated unfairly by her participation in their events.

The only people that could remotely have any problem with her running would be: countrymates who miss out on representing in international championships due to her presence, athletes who fail to advance to a semi or final because of her presence, athletes who place one spot lower in a final due to her presence, athletes who are unable to join an international race field or finish one spot lower due to her presence.

In total, you are talking about maybe 5 or 6 individuals being effected by this every year. And even though they may take some kind of financial hit, they are ultimately committing themselves to a sport where that is a possibility. No one is entitled to get an Olympic medal or even qualify for the final.

The sport as a whole is better when athletes at the top of their game get to dominate. I would much rather watch Semenya run 1:54 and crush a field than watch a bunch of runners run 1:58 and finish in a cluster. It's the same with the men's 800 where Rudisha running 1:41 or Brazier running 1:42 and dominating is better than a blanket finish of 1:44-1:45 guys.

At the very least, don't you want to see the best runners compete at their best?

George Gilder wrote:

Manipulation of "her" testosterone should make no difference

I have a cousin who is XXY (Klinefelters syndrome). Doesn't present much differently than a pudgy, unathletic man (phew. In rural ohio, that's the male uniform - he can pass as a typical man). But what if I used my knowledge of him to bully him, writing his pronouns in quotation marks simply because I'm not convinced he fits my definition of a man (he is sterile, and he has enlarged breasts). I would argue, at that point, my opinion on his identity does not meaningfully matter, and I know it would be messed up to assert my definition of what he is OVERTOP his own understanding of himself. It's not that I'd be technically incorrect to do so, it's that it's a cruel practice to engage in.

It's weird how the people posting with "founder club flair" are also the people making a point to misgender this woman, or to call her gender into question. Going after someone like this...speaks to a lack of a shared sense of humanity. When you think about this issue outside of the typical partisan, politicized way...it becomes clear how messed up you are being.

George Gilder wrote:

smdh wrote:

she should be required to take testosterone reducing drugs in order to compete fairly against women, but it also makes sense she wouldn't want to do that.

Manipulation of "her" testosterone should make no difference

He can compete

He has been

Yeah, LRC, gotta call out one of your "subscribers club members" for deliberate misgendering of a person. You know who they are. I'd love a public response to how y'all plan to handle this type of obvious and recurring problem.

Can you understand why I don't use the "report post" button as often anymore? Does it make sense yet?

I agree. When it comes to silliness, this takes the cake.

What is the minimum number of individuals that need to be affected by her participation before we act in the name of parity? I'll give you that Semenya is a women. She is not, however, a biological female. We don't race self identify against self identity, but rather body against body. Her body is not remotely comparable to that of a biological female. And no, I don't particularly want to watch a biological male beat the best female 800 runners in the world. A race whose outcome is preordained is simply not worth watching. I would welcome a reasonable debate on the matter, but you lack the ability to participate. Life is just not fair sometimes.

Viking21 wrote:

What is the minimum number of individuals that need to be affected by her participation before we act in the name of parity? I'll give you that Semenya is a women. She is not, however, a biological female. We don't race self identify against self identity, but rather body against body. Her body is not remotely comparable to that of a biological female. And no, I don't particularly want to watch a biological male beat the best female 800 runners in the world. A race whose outcome is preordained is simply not worth watching. I would welcome a reasonable debate on the matter, but you lack the ability to participate. Life is just not fair sometimes.

I agree with two of your points here. Yes, her body is not remotely comparable to a typical female. That is what makes it a worthwhile thing to watch her run. She is the best at what she does and I appreciate greatness. Did you not watch Bolt or Rudisha in their prime because the outcome was predordained? Do you not watch Kipchoge now?

The second point you made it that life is just not fair sometimes. Does Melissa Bishop feel that it was unfair that she did not get a gold medal? Probably, but life is just not fair sometimes.

Semenya is 46XY - the same as you or any other male. So why should Melissa Bishop or any other woman be competing against biological males?

According to this:

https://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html

Some males are 46XX and some females are 46XY.

Seems to me that if you call a person "a female who is 46XY," you are still calling that person a female. If this was such an open and shut case, then why not just say, "Everyone who is 46XY is a male?"

Isn't it hypocritical to recognize her femininity by calling her female, but saying she should run against men?

Lenny Leonard wrote:

According to this:

https://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html

Some males are 46XX and some females are 46XY.

Seems to me that if you call a person "a female who is 46XY," you are still calling that person a female. If this was such an open and shut case, then why not just say, "Everyone who is 46XY is a male?"

Isn't it hypocritical to recognize her femininity by calling her female, but saying she should run against men?

Semenya is DSD46XY. That means she is biologically male with "differences of sexual development ". Additionally, she identifies as female. However her male biological features- her hypoandrogenism - mean she has male levels of testosterone. In women, that would be like someone who is on a performance enhancing drug. That is why the IAAF says she can only compete as a woman if she brings her testosterone back to typical female levels (which is less than 5nmols- most women are about 0.5/2.0, but a few hypoandrogenic XX females may be a little higher).

What you wrote is pretty much the basic understanding of semenya, no?

Why doesn't that guy just go compete with men like he should?

Stop the charade already. jeeze.