David Epstein explains why he no long supports the Semenya testosterone policies.

+1. The frequency with which “It’s obvious!” is used as a justification for a position is directly negatively correlated with how obvious the position is. And yes, bringing up red herrings such as chromosomes and testes, use of the loaded “biological male” term, conflation of sex and gender, and a lack of knowledge historical context are all hallmarks of his discussion on this site.

The thing that always shocks me is that, for a website where posters have such a healthy (“healthy”) fear of so many types of institutional overreach, on this issue so many LetsRunners are willing to side with an institution making a far-reaching decision which affects athlete’s livelihoods without better evidence than “it’s obvious.” I get that instinctively many of us think this is the right decision, but I wonder if it were as obvious to decision-makers that a trait found in, say, Shelby Houlihan (or some other individual or group of individuals that LetsRunners are predisposed to thinking is competing fairly) were an unfair advantage and was used to ban her we would be as quick to side with the decision-makers or whether we would demand definitive science?

It‘s dangerous to agree with poorly backed-up decision just because it matches our preconceived notions. How we arrive at decisions matters, because bad process leading to an outcome that may be right can pave the way to bad process leading to an outcome that is assuredly wrong. The process is a guardrail against those bad decisions, and should only be removed, if ever, in case of an existential threat—this isn’t that.

Also, I always wonder when people talk about testing, who they are proposing be tested—all athletes who wish to compete in the female division of elite athletics? If not, who is selected for testing? I worry that the biases of our largely European decision-makers would likely taint that testing selection process.

Caster has 5 alpha reductase syndrome. This has been widely reported. 5ARD is a condition that is only found in biological males. Therefore Caster is a biological male. The idea that we would even entertain allowing males to compete with females is insane

https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/5-alpha-reductase-deficiency

I understand that she is 46XY but am less clear on what her exact status is. I believe that she can't have Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS) because her body by definition would not be able to use the testosterone. So does she have Partial AIS or some other syndrome?

I feel that a lot of the misconceptions in this case especially from people long on gender politics but woefully lacking in any knowledge of athletics or human biology come from not understanding her condition.

To make my position clear, she should never have been allowed to compete in the women's category once the authorities knew the answer to my question. This isn't her fault although some of the things she has reputedly said don't help her in my eyes. To be fair she has been on the receiving end of a lot of uninformed garbage.

Vancomycin wrote:

Translation: I’m too dumb to read 1000 words and make an argument about “facts not feelings”

:)

gkdkv wrote:

Translation: "To comment on this thread you may not present any counterpoints to what I am saying"

Tldr on the article though

The FACT is Caster is genetically a MAN. That is the ONLY fact that matters. Caster should race against other men. Nothing else needs to be said.

Sorry, I was still writing my post while the one immediately above was saved so I didn't see it until now. Oh for the simple joy of an edit facility.

The public is largely ignorant about the Semenya issue. Most people think she has been treated too harshly. Others think IAAF is a racist organization.

The person to blame for this disinformation is none other than Coe and IAAF. They haven't been clear about why Semenya is barred. And there are several IAAF websites with contradictory and unclear information on the DSD regulations.

Hence all the bogus comparisons with Michael Phelps. Poor messaging will cost IAAF big time.

Vancomycin wrote:

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.

So would you like to ban those woman who don't get an advantage in addition to the ones that do get an advantage? Partial insensitivity is another way of saying partial sensitivity:). At some point a line has to be drawn. We could draw it at XX. We could draw it at XY with androgen insensitivity. Or we can keep shifting. But at some point you end up having to draw a line. And it isn't remotely clear where that line should be.

Don't let the facts confuse you. I haven't been here for "six years". About one, actually.

As for what is "obvious", that doesn't deter those who find any reason, no matter how specious, to cling to their misconceptions and prejudices - and do so by trying to cite science in their perception the world is flat - or that there is no climate crisis, no pandemic and even that Trump tells the truth. Debate doesn't prove complexity; only that some prejudices are immovable to reason. You're welcome.

It also seems that the "whining" here is from those who continue to protest the IAAF rule - which is supported incidentally by the Swiss Appeal Court. I am not one of them. But you appear to be. You're also welcome.

Simple solution: Everyone competes based on testosterone levels. This includes internex, trans and cis. 2 categories. One consistent with typical female levels, another with male.

Regardless of how one identifies, you must complete in your testosterone group.

This is perfectly fair for Semeyna. She can compete with the higher testosterone group, or take hormone blockers and compete with the women.

dong kardon wrote:

Agree with the first point 3hr. Disagree with the second. How would you feel lining up in an olympic final or world champs next to an athlete like Semenya? We shouldn't wait for fairness. She has already had a stint in the limelight, that's fine, but we need real rules now. Every event, not just 400-1500. Why they came up with that is beyond me.

...

I mostly agree. I wish sweeping and fair rules were in place at the start of Semenya's career and as rerunner said the needs on the many outweigh the needs of the one. I only suggest she be grandfathered in because this thing has been mishandled for so long. There are precedents for that in other sports. Established spitballers were allowed to continue altering the ball in baseball in the US even after the practice was banned. Maybe others can think of other precedents. She is after all the reigning Olympic champion. That at least seems to be grandfathered in -- no retrospective ban is in the works.

gkdkv wrote:

Translation: "To comment on this thread you may not present any counterpoints to what I am saying"

Tldr on the article though

+1

Who?

Who cares?

runnER/DR wrote:

Simple solution: Everyone competes based on testosterone levels. This includes internex, trans and cis. 2 categories. One consistent with typical female levels, another with male.

Simpler solution: do away with gender classifications and just have everyone compete together.

The male and female divisions have to be divided one way or another. The best way for sport is to say that the female division is open to those who are 46 XX. And the male division is the open division that is open to all others.

Its not perfect. But it is simple and clear and less controversial than asking DSD people to alter their bodies.

I wouldn't worry about males who are 46XX because they are so few 1/30,000 and are unlikely to pursue sport at the professional level.

The division of male and female in sports does not have to be an exact science. Stop asking experts for their opinions. You will never get consensus. Some experts just like rambling on and on and wring 100 page papers. Forget them.

Just divide the categories as 46 XX (Women) and all others

You know what's weird? I never see cis-women (or trans-men) competing in men's events. If you look at lists of trans athletes, I would say most trans-men competed as women before transitioning.

If the ONLY difference is testosterone, then people who wish to identify as men (but started their life with XX) should be able to compete with men after they begin to take hormones.

I would be happy to see someone prove me wrong on this.

But, I guess you'll call me a TERF or something for stating this.

BotBeepBot wrote:

You know what's weird? I never see cis-women (or trans-men) competing in men's events AT A WORLD-RECORD LEVEL. If you look at lists of trans athletes, I would say most trans-men competed as women before transitioning.

If the ONLY difference is testosterone, then people who wish to identify as men (but started their life with XX) should be able to compete with men after they begin to take hormones.

I would be happy to see someone prove me wrong on this.

But, I guess you'll call me a TERF or something for stating this.

Edited for clarity

Drumroll wrote:

The male and female divisions have to be divided one way or another. The best way for sport is to say that the female division is open to those who are 46 XX. And the male division is the open division that is open to all others.

Its not perfect. But it is simple and clear and less controversial than asking DSD people to alter their bodies.

I wouldn't worry about males who are 46XX because they are so few 1/30,000 and are unlikely to pursue sport at the professional level.

The division of male and female in sports does not have to be an exact science. Stop asking experts for their opinions. You will never get consensus. Some experts just like rambling on and on and wring 100 page papers. Forget them.

Just divide the categories as 46 XX (Women) and all others

Nah it is more controversial which is why we moved away from it in the 90s after doing it for the previous couple of decades. This scheme would ban even more people from competing including groups who have gained no competive advantage from their genetics. The only plus is that it is really binary which appeals to a lot of people.

runnER/DR wrote:

Simple solution: Everyone competes based on testosterone levels. This includes internex, trans and cis. 2 categories. One consistent with typical female levels, another with male.

Regardless of how one identifies, you must complete in your testosterone group.

This is perfectly fair for Semeyna. She can compete with the higher testosterone group, or take hormone blockers and compete with the women.

_______________

Except it's not that simple because male T levels at puberty are responsible for many irreversible changes in the body, including bigger heart and lungs, narrow hips, and greater muscle mass. History cannot be undone. This is why transmen are unlikely to be competitive on the world stage; they underwent female puberty, and therefore, never got the same advantages as those who went through male puberty. One study found that transmen taking cross-sex hormones are still weaker than transwomen taking cross-sex hormones for a year. In other words, males suppressing T and taking estrogen are STILL stronger than females actively taking T. Things might start to converge after longer than 12 months, but there is currently no evidence suggesting that even cross-sex hormones level the playing field. Note that the women who would compete against tranwomen would not (or should not be) taking T.

As far as evidence is concerned in the Semenya case: I've read that the most compelling evidence is confidential information on the number of medals won in international competition by intersex people competing in the women's division.