Would it really be that hard for someone to do a chromosome test on Caster? Karyotyping is relatively cheap and easy these days, and it only requires a few cells. Couldn't someone just swipe Caster's toothbrush and send it for testing or something?
Would LRers be willing to contribute the money to make this happen?
rekrunner wrote:
No one, to my knowledge, has offered a solution that is both fair to Semenya, and to her competitors.
There is no "fair" solution. You reduce her test to "normal" levels for the rest of the woman in the field and she gets crushed. Don't reduce them and she dominates. But at a high level athletics has never been fair. People are born with advantages and the question is which ones are allowable. Make a 3rd division and nobody care about it about as much as they do the special olympics...
What we don't know (and don't know if we can know) is how far of an outlier she is talent wise. Lets say the rest of the field are all 1:100 million athletes. Is she also 1:100 million or is she more like 1:100k who has say a 5% advantage due to the condition? In the first case, she is like 1-2s faster than the best undoped woman. People might be able to live with that. If it is the second, eventually we will get someone who is a 1:10 million talent who will drop like a 1:49 which will be a gap that might be hard to stomache.
I.A.A.F. cannot prove high T-levels means one will race sub-1:56 800m. There are plenty of male (60 to 100)m men and male elite throwers with higher natural T-levels than Caster S. who never had ability to race sub-1:56 800m. Posters will state: One must have somewhat of a runner's build, one must put in the mileage and one must do 200m & 300m repeats with short recovery. My response is, exactly! I.A.A.F. and so-called elite women 800m runners of European heritage have complained and asked us to simply use our eyes. I.A.A.F. cannot prove runners with 250 to 1000 generations of continuous existence at 5000 feet elevation have a performance advantage in events 5000m to Marathon and maybe from distances as short as 800m. There is a gene possessed by those 250 to 1000 generations at higher elevation. A gene which makes one resistant to altitude sickness. Is I.A.A.F. going test for said gene and force runners with said gene to race events 400m and shorter to make it so-called fair for runners of European heritage? Runners from Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda are the fastest from 3000m to Marathon and may also be strong at shorter distance events. Are European athletes going to set aside critical science and just ask us to use our eyes? The correlation with higher T-levels and middle distance performance cannot be a strong correlation. If higher T-levels made one a fast 800m man, Bo Jackson and Lawrence Taylor would be the fastest 800m men ever.
Seems like having functioning testies internal or not should be a disqualifying metric. In fact ever having them should be a disqualifying metric. Some of the changes that happen in puberty are not really reversible despite what some people think.
If being born a biological women wasn’t an athletic disadvantage there wouldn’t be a women’s category. We could all just compete together. Believing this category is at all related to gender is a complete misunderstanding of why women’s sports exist in the first place.
maple log wrote:
Seems like having functioning testies internal or not should be a disqualifying metric. In fact ever having them should be a disqualifying metric. Some of the changes that happen in puberty are not really reversible despite what some people think.
If being born a biological women wasn’t an athletic disadvantage there wouldn’t be a women’s category. We could all just compete together. Believing this category is at all related to gender is a complete misunderstanding of why women’s sports exist in the first place.
+1.
I don’t know why we’re still discussing this.
Caster has a Y chromosome and has internal testes that produce male amounts of testosteron.
OK, he/she has a vagina but that’s less significant than the Y chromosome and the testes.
We are still talking about it because the IAAF was dumb enough to think allowing athletes to suppress hormones with drugs was a good idea. It is pretty much the worst solution they could have come up with. Worse than allowing them to just compete.
Charlesvdw wrote:
maple log wrote:
Seems like having functioning testies internal or not should be a disqualifying metric. In fact ever having them should be a disqualifying metric. Some of the changes that happen in puberty are not really reversible despite what some people think.
If being born a biological women wasn’t an athletic disadvantage there wouldn’t be a women’s category. We could all just compete together. Believing this category is at all related to gender is a complete misunderstanding of why women’s sports exist in the first place.
+1.
I don’t know why we’re still discussing this.
Caster has a Y chromosome and has internal testes that produce male amounts of testosteron.
OK, he/she has a vagina but that’s less significant than the Y chromosome and the testes.
We are discussing it because some people will never stop looking for a reason to deny the obvious. It is the same mindset that endlessly rejects that there is a Covid pandemic - which we also see plenty of on this site.
maple log wrote:
Seems like having functioning testies internal or not should be a disqualifying metric. In fact ever having them should be a disqualifying metric. Some of the changes that happen in puberty are not really reversible despite what some people think.
If being born a biological women wasn’t an athletic disadvantage there wouldn’t be a women’s category. We could all just compete together. Believing this category is at all related to gender is a complete misunderstanding of why women’s sports exist in the first place.
You are creating your own ruling. I.A.A.F. stated Caster Semenya may participate in events (400 to 1500)m, but Caster Semenya must take drugs to lower C Semenya's natural T-level. I.A.A.F. have only placed restrictions for C. Semenya to compete in those three events. C. Semenya is free to compete in hammer throw, javelin, discus throw, shot put, pole vault, 100m dash, 200m dash, 100m hurdles, 400m hurdles, 3000m SC, 5000m, 10000m, Marathon, triple jump, long jump and high jump with no alteration of C. Semenya's natural T-levels. See my statements regarding whinny 800m women of European heritage. I.A.A.F.'s ruling is not similar to your statements.
The IAAF is wrong to let her compete by suppressing her hormones. It is the worst solution they could have come up with. I understand the ruling, I just think it is garbage and they can do better.
I offered the best solution - let Caster compete with his natural levels of hormones - but in the Paralympics. Create an XXY/trans category in the paralympics.
problem solved.
maple log wrote:
The IAAF is wrong to let her compete by suppressing her hormones. It is the worst solution they could have come up with. I understand the ruling, I just think it is garbage and they can do better.
By doing what?
The question is not whether we should allow her to compete in the female category. The underlying factor is that we have for decades (centuries?) been using the traditional binary gender system to divide athletic competitions. But, unfortunately, we now know that there are many who do not fit neatly into these categories. So, what do we do?
1) Let everyone self identify their gender?
2) Abolish gender categories?
Just to stir the pot.
1) Is it unfair for someone born 7'1" to play basketball against a 5'11" player?
2) According to Epstein (The Sports Gene), Kenyans have a biological advantage in distance running. Should the rest of us be given a handicap?
I don't claim to have the answer. I just think we are asking the wrong question.
But.... wrote:
The question is not whether we should allow her to compete in the female category. The underlying factor is that we have for decades (centuries?) been using the traditional binary gender system to divide athletic competitions. But, unfortunately, we now know that there are many who do not fit neatly into these categories. So, what do we do?
1) Let everyone self identify their gender?
2) Abolish gender categories?
Just to stir the pot.
1) Is it unfair for someone born 7'1" to play basketball against a 5'11" player?
2) According to Epstein (The Sports Gene), Kenyans have a biological advantage in distance running. Should the rest of us be given a handicap?
I don't claim to have the answer. I just think we are asking the wrong question.
1. No, unless it's an under-6 foot league. Just like it's fair to have men race women, unless you decide to divide it up into mens and womens divisions. Once you do that, you have to have criteria and sometimes make difficult decisions about edge cases.
2. No, unless you have a Kenyan/non-Kenyan race. Just like it's fair to have men race women, unless you decide to divide it up into mens and womens divisions.
See where this is going?
We've collectively decided that separate mens and womens divisions are essential for fair sport. Until that changes, there has to be plausible criteria for deciding edge cases. Not everyone ends up happy in the end and there are real tradeoffs and tragedies involved. You can avoid those tragedies if you prefer to eliminate the mens/womens division split. There's no easy way around this.
The article is rambling, mealy-mouthed, full of name dropping for protection, and weak in argumentation and evidence, because he is afraid that he might become labeled as trans-phobic.
He should just make a clear argument for or against, using evidence without telling us who he's friends with, etc. With regard to those claims he does make, it's clearly false to say that testosterone is the only significant advantage between men and women. Current testosterone production is important, of course, but there are dozens of known physiological advantages for men who went through puberty, from heart and lung capacity to musculature (he does allow for this difference). Higher oxygen carrying capacity, more hemoglobin, longer and larger bones (bigger levers), wider frame, narrower pelvis, higher strength to weight ratio, [lower efficiency in converting glycogen to energy], lower percentage body fat, and there are many others.
She shouldn't be allowed to compete against women. It's the women's, not hermaphrodite division. I don't want to humiliate or disparage her. The blame for this situation belongs on those who have encouraged her build her life on track and field knowing she isn't a true biological female in the name of "social justice" or whatever. The further she goes down the road to competing as a female as a professional athlete, the harder it's going to be for her when the consequences of fighting reality come crashing in. I say "her" out of respect whereas I would not say it for a transgendered person, but she is not a female.
feel the bern wrote:
Caster should NEVER have been allowed to compete against women. There should be a separate division for XXY and transgender in the PARALYMPICS. This way Caster still gets to compete and be gold medalist - but in a fair competition.
It's the same as the wheelchair marathoners. The men's wheelchair marathon record is like 1 hour and 20 minutes. There's no genetic differences but clearly it's an advantage compared to men running on their own 2 legs. Do we let wheelchair marathoners compete in the same division as able-bodied men? No.
Paralympics for Caster is the only answer. Don't require any drugs or hormones or anything.
Yeah I am with you here. Sport gender classification hasn't evolved since when? The mid 1800's? I don't exactly when but let's just say it's been around for a long time. On the flip side the human race has seen considerable evolvement both physically and socially. Physically in that athletes like Caster (intersex identifying as either men or women) are much more prevalent. Socially as in there is far more access for all humans irrespective of gender to compete in sports - based on that alone we should not be shocked at the wider spectrum of physiologies that now are able to compete at a high level.
Quite simply more categories need to exist. Do those categories become part of an able-bodied event like the Summer Olympics? Not for me to say - I don't see why not, but I can imagine the stigma and acceptance issues so maybe the P-Olympics is better.
Your analogy of wheelchair marathoners is extreme but I like it because it takes it to a first principal level. The athletes are no different other than a physical condition (which is fundamentally exactly how you would describe Caster). But they can't compete against limbed athletes because of that physical difference pertaining to an advantage too out of scope. It is clear that Casters advantage is also way too out of scope for her to compete with other females who all have similar physical and hormonal traits.
It's pretty clear cut and simple actually.
He states in the article that trans women should probably be excluded from competition with cis-women. But nice try rubber stamping your forgone conclusion into a actually rambling LRC post that contributes nothing!
zxcvzcvx wrote:
The article is rambling, mealy-mouthed, full of name dropping for protection, and weak in argumentation and evidence, because he is afraid that he might become labeled as trans-phobic.
He should just make a clear argument for or against, using evidence without telling us who he's friends with, etc. With regard to those claims he does make, it's clearly false to say that testosterone is the only significant advantage between men and women. Current testosterone production is important, of course, but there are dozens of known physiological advantages for men who went through puberty, from heart and lung capacity to musculature (he does allow for this difference). Higher oxygen carrying capacity, more hemoglobin, longer and larger bones (bigger levers), wider frame, narrower pelvis, higher strength to weight ratio, [lower efficiency in converting glycogen to energy], lower percentage body fat, and there are many others.
If you had read more than 10 minutes on this topic you'd know this is what the IOC USED TO DO. It wasn't successful. Jesus Christ, every time we have this conversation the same 3 points get repeated with no one learning. I am undecided as to whether Semenya should be allowed to compete with women, but if the best argument the "anti" camp can produce is ideas from the 80s - you will never win. We can bemoan the IAAF's approach but at least they are trying to develop a rigorous framework, rather than just handwave about 7th grade biology? Armstonglivs is the worst of all of you. He has been claiming this is "obvious" for like 6 years. Bro, we wouldn't be here if was that obvious, accept the complexity, try and learn what's actually being discussed between the governing bodies and, most of all, stop whining.
could we test Caster? wrote:
Would it really be that hard for someone to do a chromosome test on Caster? Karyotyping is relatively cheap and easy these days, and it only requires a few cells. Couldn't someone just swipe Caster's toothbrush and send it for testing or something?
Would LRers be willing to contribute the money to make this happen?
Vancomycin wrote:
If you had read more than 10 minutes on this topic you'd know this is what the IOC USED TO DO. It wasn't successful.
Jesus Christ, every time we have this conversation the same 3 points get repeated with no one learning.
I am undecided as to whether Semenya should be allowed to compete with women, but if the best argument the "anti" camp can produce is ideas from the 80s - you will never win. We can bemoan the IAAF's approach but at least they are trying to develop a rigorous framework, rather than just handwave about 7th grade biology?
Armstonglivs is the worst of all of you. He has been claiming this is "obvious" for like 6 years. Bro, we wouldn't be here if was that obvious, accept the complexity, try and learn what's actually being discussed between the governing bodies and, most of all, stop whining.
could we test Caster? wrote:
Would it really be that hard for someone to do a chromosome test on Caster? Karyotyping is relatively cheap and easy these days, and it only requires a few cells. Couldn't someone just swipe Caster's toothbrush and send it for testing or something?
Would LRers be willing to contribute the money to make this happen?
It doesn't really matter what the IOC does/did because the IOC wouldn't be able to publicly release the results anyway. I'm trying to think of a way that we could all know the result by doing some kind of testing on the DL.
Through various leaks back in like 2010 it was all but confirmed that Semenya is XY but has some form of partial androgen insensitivity. Again, you have all enthusiastically cheered for women athletes who had a Y chromsome with near complete androgen insensitivity. They appeared more classically phenotypically female than Semenya, and so you never caused a fuss. This is one of the reason the IOC stopped chromosomal testing as exclusionary measure in the 90s.
could we test Caster? wrote:
It doesn't really matter what the IOC does/did because the IOC wouldn't be able to publicly release the results anyway. I'm trying to think of a way that we could all know the result by doing some kind of testing on the DL.