Article on Namibian Sprinters barred from 400

The world has a right to know if men are caught trying to compete in the same category as women.

Article is OLD.

I am shocked, shocked I tell ya, at the notion that Namibian sports officials who are full-grown men might be lying to the press and public about the sex of teenage XY DSD athletes they've chosen to enter into elite international women's competition in a scheme to score easy wins and bring home all sports gold and glory.

I am further shocked by the idea that such men - motivated by their own political and mercenary aims - might callously exploit black African teenagers with DSDs from their own country who grew up poor and provincial by putting them on the world stage to compete in the highest level of women's sports - knowing full well that this inevitably would expose the teens to special scrutiny and extensive speculation about their sex, which most young people would find deeply distressing.

Not in a million years would any of the middle-aged men running any national sports organizations anywhere on the planet be so exploitive or mendacious, right? Just like no over-the-hill men like Mboma's and Maslingi's coach, Henk Botha, would ever think to scour the African countryside looking for XY DSD youngsters who have running talent in hopes of turning them into world-beating champions in women's elite track and field.

And nothing like this has ever happened before. Oh wait...

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/south-africa-top-track-official-lied-athlete-caster-semenya-gender-test-article-1.176429

https://mg.co.za/article/2009-09-18-semenya-saga-chuenes-trail-of-lies/

https://sportsscientists.com/2009/09/caster-semenya-cover-ups-lies-and-confusion/

Finally, I'm shocked that the men who might be using Mboma and Masilingi in this way, and cynically lying about the teenagers' sex, could be from Namibia, a country that until 1990 was part of/under control of South Africa.

Seriously now: as a pp pointed out, the article in the OP is more than two months old. If Mboma and Masilingi truly are female and thus really have been treated unfairly and unlawfully by WA, it's surprising that Namibian sports officials haven't filed formal complaints against WA yet. It's also odd that nothing has come of the appeals made on behalf of the two Namibian teen runners to the UN Human Rights Council over the summer. Then again, maybe the Namibian authorities are holding off on filing papers against WA until the current season of competition winds up.

Speaking of which, Mboma racked up another women's 200m win in Zagreb today, setting a new meet record. (Masilingi has been out sick for a while now.)

Yeah, "they" are the liars. You have absolutely no evidence they are XY, no one has ever said they are XY, not even WA, but you have decided that they are because you are either too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what the actual rules say about DSD and who it actually effects.

There is noting worse than a stupid person that's too stupid to understand how stupid they are.

Ray Cyst wrote:

Yeah, "they" are the liars. You have absolutely no evidence they are XY, no one has ever said they are XY, not even WA, but you have decided that they are because you are either too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what the actual rules say about DSD and who it actually effects.

There is noting worse than a stupid person that's too stupid to understand how stupid they are.

From the Executive Summary of the CAS decision in the Semenya case:

6. During the course of the proceedings before the CAS, the IAAF explained that, following an amendment to the DSD Regulations, the DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to “46 XY DSD” – i.e. conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes. Accordingly, no individuals with XX chromosomes are subjected to any restrictions or eligibility conditions under the DSD Regulations.

23. Having carefully considered the expert evidence, the majority of the Panel concludes that androgen sensitive female athletes with 46 XY DSD enjoy a significant performance advantage over other female athletes without such DSD, and that this advantage is attributable to their exposure to levels of circulating testosterone in the normal adult male range, rather than the normal adult female range. The majority of the Panel observes that the evidence concerning the performances and statistical over-representation of female athletes with 46 XY DSD in certain Relevant Events demonstrates that the elevated testosterone levels that such athletes possess creates a significant and often determinative performance advantage over other female athletes who do not have a 46 XY DSD condition.

24. On this basis, the majority of the Panel accepts that the IAAF has discharged its burden of establishing that regulations governing the ability of female athletes with 46XY DSD to participate in certain events are necessary to maintain fair competition in female athletics...

So they are XY, or they would not be affected by the rules. Not so stupid after all.

As a matter of curiosity, where are the XX athletes competing with male levels of testosterone?

Ray Cyst wrote:

Yeah, "they" are the liars. You have absolutely no evidence they are XY, no one has ever said they are XY, not even WA, but you have decided that they are because you are either too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what the actual rules say about DSD and who it actually effects.

There is noting worse than a stupid person that's too stupid to understand how stupid they are.

On 13 May 2021, The Conversation published an article by a sports scientist doing research that challenges the widely-held but probably mistaken assumption that endogenous T leads to stronger athletic performance in XX female persons with ovaries and female physiology the way it does in XY male persons (with and without DSDs) who have testes and male physiology. On 24 June 2021, the article was heavily revised because when it was originally written, the author thought that the current WA DSD regulations apply to athletes competing in women's events with XX sex chromosomes. Apparently, WA wrote to her saying this is not the case. Now the article has a note at the end that says:

Correction: this article previously discussed the World Athletics eligibility regulations for female athletes. In correspondence to The Conversation, World Athletics has said its regulations relate to females with 46-XY chromosomes. The subjects of the author’s research are females with 46-XX chromosomes. To account for this, all references to World Athletics regulations have been removed from this article.

Yeah, get his ass ragged! Talk to em! 🗣

RunRagged wrote:

Ray Cyst wrote:

Yeah, "they" are the liars. You have absolutely no evidence they are XY, no one has ever said they are XY, not even WA, but you have decided that they are because you are either too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what the actual rules say about DSD and who it actually effects.

There is noting worse than a stupid person that's too stupid to understand how stupid they are.

https://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/dsd-regulations-call-out-athletes-as-biologically-male/

They are as confused as you are. They, like others, assume that because WA said their rules only affect XY DSD, that the Namibians MUST therefore be XY. There is no proof of that and WA has not stated that and the rules don't support that. I explained this already in a very lengthy thread that dealt with this topic and explained how one of the DSD's that is effectively banned, primarily affects XX individuals. It's called Ovotesticular DSD and WA even admits that this DSD affects XX individuals, their position is that a person with Ovotesticular DSD would not have circulating testosterone high enough to meet the criteria. I already showed how that is a lie and that it's not even a very good lie because a 10 year old with access to Google could find multiple cases of XX OT DSD with adult male level testosterone levels.

You don't know what you don't know and that's what makes you so dangerously ignorant.

Stay tuned. Now that I've been slagged off for being "a stupid person that's too stupid to understand how stupid they are" and also "too lazy" to read the relevant regs and documents to boot, I'm sure another one of the puerile posters who like to call names will be along soon to say I'm a bigot and racist too.

douglas burke wrote:

https://news.yahoo.com/namibia-blasts-world-athletics-over-145322676.html

“Nuts in the Guts” athletes……

Mate, I've been on those threads. I've described the gonadal patterns that people with OT DSD have in detail on those threads too.

Yes, persons who have XX OT DSD - and OT DSD with unusual sex chromosome patterns indicative of mosaicism or chimerism - can have testosterone in the adult male range. But to do so, they have to be born with gonads in which the predominant functional tissue is testicular tissue. In other words, they have de facto testes.

Also, to be subject to the WA DSD rules for eligibility in women's competition, affected athletes have to be able to use the endogenous T they naturally make in the ways that XY males typically do. XX female people born with ovaries don't use the endogenous T our bodies naturally make in the same way that males do. (Just as most of the very small total amount of T that XX female people produce does not come from our female gonads the way >95% of the endogenous T that males make comes from their male gonads).

Moreover, if you look not just at reports of individual cases, but papers on groups of persons with XX OT DSD, you'll see that whether they are born in Africa or China, the majority across the board are customarily raised as male and regard themselves to be male - and this is especially the case for those in whom testicular tissue is the primary functional gonadal tissue and who thus might naturally produce male levels of T. The case reports show that it's not uncommon for XX OT persons whose functional gonadal tissue is predominantly testicular to have fully developed penises too. Such persons are not likely to be competing in girls' track & field at age 16, and they're not likely to be competing in elite international women's events once they turn 18.

I also believe I've mentioned on those threads that OT DSD is the rarest of all the already extremely rare conditions known as DSDs. Because there are no worldwide stats, no one really know how prevalent OT DSD or other DSDs are, but the estimates I've read say that OT DSD occurs in 1 of every 50, 000 births, whereas XY 5-ARD, the DSD that Caster Semenya has, occurs in 1 of every 20,000 births. Also, the records going back to the 1980s/90s show that two most common DSDs found amongst elite international women's athletics over the past 30-40 years have been XY AIS and XY 5-ARD.

Of course, it's possible that two same-age athletes from the same country who burst onto the world state in elite women's at the exact same time would both be XX OT DSD. But I suspect it's highly unlikely.

On a side note: now that you've called me stupid, lazy and ignorant for the umpteenth time, and have added that I'm a liar, worse at research than a 10 year-old and dangerous too, I gotta ask: Does irascibly insulting the intelligence everyone with different views to yours work well for you IRL?

Everything you have said, I have already said, starting on the day they announced the rule The point, that you just conformed, is that when WA said, and you repeated, that their rules do not affect XX individuals, that was and still is untrue. OT DSD is specifically listed in their rules and that affects XX individuals. How rare it is, is irrelevant. 6 foot tall women are also rare, but there sure seem to be a lot of them in the WNBA. Gee, what are the odds that so many tall women just end up on in the same league?

Maybe you are too sensitive, I don't insult people for having a differing view, I insult them for being criminally stupid with an inability to discern facts; I am doing them a favor. Being stupid alone is not a crime, it's the public display of it that is troublesome. I have to step in when people who are stupid pretend to be smart about things they have little knowledge of other than Google. That's where my public service comes in and the education process starts. Sorry if you fall into that category, but... you're welcome.

Ray Cyst wrote:

I don't insult people for having a differing view, I insult them for being criminally stupid with an inability to discern facts; I am doing them a favor. Being stupid alone is not a crime, it's the public display of it that is troublesome. I have to step in when people who are stupid pretend to be smart about things they have little knowledge of other than Google. That's where my public service comes in and the education process starts. Sorry if you fall into that category, but... you're welcome.

The bellicose and boorish manner in which you choose to make your points certainly makes a strong impression - just not the impressive one you think it does. All your red-in-the face sputtering from on high about how those who disagree with you are "stupid stupid stupid" and some of us are even "criminally stupid" makes you come off as risible, in fact.

Again, I wonder: Does the irrationally churlish, accusatory, condescending, childishly name-calling way you respond to people on the internet whom you deem to be intellectually inferior to you work well for you IRL? Or am I mistaken in thinking you know people IRL?

As for your claim that the extreme rarity of OT DSD "is irrelevant" to the case of Mboma and Masilingi because of tall women in the NBA, I don't think that's a convincing argument for the likelihood that two DSD athletes of the same age from the same country - who just happened to have been discovered and trained by the same coach - both are XX with the most vanishingly rare of all already rare DSDs.

Then again, it is possible. But given the level of corruption and mendacity in elite international sports, the particular politics of Namibia before and following its independence from South Africa, and the geopolitical and symbolic significance of DSD athletes from sub-Saharan Africa in women's international athletics since Semenya was put on the world stage in 2009, I'd wager it's more likely that the Namibian sports officials are lying their asses off just like South African sports officials have done for years about Caster Semenya.

Also, you did not address my salient material points: 1) for persons with XX OT DSD to produce male levels of T they have to have de facto testes; 2) for the WA rules to apply to persons with OT DSD, they would also have to the ability to make use of the male levels of endogenous T their de facto testes make as males typically do, meaning at least in that regard they'd have male physiology; and 3) persons with XX OT DSD who have de facto testes that produce male levels of T and who respond to endogenous T as males typically do are customarily regarded and raised as males, and see themselves as male - thus they are unlikely to be claiming to be female, or to "identify as" female, in order to compete in elite international women's sports.

(Although I admit that in the case of 3), when the prospect of sports gold and glory is dangled in front of their eyes, teenage DSD athletes from very poor and provincial backgrounds who were raised as males and always thought of themselves as male growing up can be convinced to claim otherwise, which appears to have happened in Caster Semenya's case.)

Finally, the elephant in the room you keep ignoring - or are unable to grasp - is that once laws and regulations are written and set in place, those tasked with enforcing said laws and regs usually issue implementation and guidance documents spelling out exactly how the laws and regs are to be interpreted and applied. Then court decisions inevitably follow that clarify the interpretation and application criteria further. Sometime courts narrow the application criteria; sometimes courts expand it. Sometimes courts throw out laws and regs entirely, striking them down as entirely unlawful.

What's happened here is: Following the Dutee Chand case, WA issued new regulations governing the eligibility of DSD athletes in women's competition. Caster Semenya challenged the new regulations in court. In the process of the court proceedings, WA clarified to the Court of Arbitration for Sport that they apply the regulations more narrowly than the regulations are written, meaning only to XY 46 DSD athletes. In its final decision, CAS states it approved the regulations specifically based on the proviso that they would be "limited to 46 XY DSD" conditions and "no individuals with XX chromosomes" would be affected.

This is clearly stated in the Executive Summary of the CAS decision in the Semenya case already posted upthread:

6. During the course of the proceedings before the CAS, the IAAF explained that, following an amendment to the DSD Regulations, the DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to “46 XY DSD” – i.e. conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes. Accordingly, no individuals with XX chromosomes are subjected to any restrictions or eligibility conditions under the DSD Regulations.

23. Having carefully considered the expert evidence, the majority of the Panel concludes that androgen sensitive female athletes with 46 XY DSD enjoy a significant performance advantage over other female athletes without such DSD, and that this advantage is attributable to their exposure to levels of circulating testosterone in the normal adult male range, rather than the normal adult female range. The majority of the Panel observes that the evidence concerning the performances and statistical over-representation of female athletes with 46 XY DSD in certain Relevant Events demonstrates that the elevated testosterone levels that such athletes possess creates a significant and often determinative performance advantage over other female athletes who do not have a 46 XY DSD condition.

24. On this basis, the majority of the Panel accepts that the IAAF has discharged its burden of establishing that regulations governing the ability of female athletes with 46XY DSD to participate in certain events are necessary to maintain fair competition in female athletics...

It could be argued that CAS made an error in approving the WA regulations based on the proviso that they'd only be applied to DSD athletes with XY chromosomes. But that's what they did all the same. If you have an issue with what CAS decided, I suggest you contact the organization and each of the individuals who served on the panel in the Semenya case to tell them how "criminally stupid" they are. The panelists' names are in the decision, and contact info is available on the CAS website. If you inform CAS and the panel members that their "criminal stupidity" has forced you to "to step in" and perform the "public service" of insulting and hectoring them into seeing things as you do, I'm sure they'll agree that it's high time their "education process starts" and that you are exactly the guy to teach 'em.

Ray Cyst loses. Again.

Ray Cyst wrote:

Maybe you are too sensitive, I don't insult people for having a differing view, I insult them for being criminally stupid with an inability to discern facts; I am doing them a favor. Being stupid alone is not a crime, it's the public display of it that is troublesome. I have to step in when people who are stupid pretend to be smart about things they have little knowledge of other than Google. That's where my public service comes in and the education process starts. Sorry if you fall into that category, but... you're welcome.

How much longer are you going to carry on in this Trumpian fashion?

Said something stupid? Nah, not going to admit that. Just scream louder and say something even more stupid, ramp each of those up until people give up and forget your original stupidity.

It worked for Trump, now every dim wit is trying it.