I'm kind of curious if CAS regrets how they ruled in the Chand case. By that logic, you need some strong evidence along the lines of the Rio 800m to ban Trans women from women's events.
Men exposing themselves to unwilling women is now the "moral, woke" thing to do now, at least according to the extreme SJW's. That'll show the patriarchy!
This means to ensure their continued participation, all girls involved in swimming will need to be genetically tested at 12 years old to check they do NOT have an androgen syndrome, because finding out later means you will not have a full record your T levels did not exceed 2.5 nmol/L during puberty.
This could affect anyone and anyone's daughter. Don't assume you would know, as especially before puberty, there could be no indicators. Be prepared.
There will be countless women athletes caught in this and will need to seek legal help to navigate FINA's new rules. A burden not placed on the men's sport.
Well, read the policy more carefully. It says unintentional deviation "MAY result in retrospective disqualification of results and/or a prospective PERIOD of ineligibility."
Those are the two keywords. A "period" of ineligibility means it's not a permanent ban. And the length of that period could vary. And it also says" may result in ineligibility, meaning it may NOT result in ineligibility depending on the circumstances. As I wrote above, I think I would have a very good case at CAS if I were representing a minor athlete.
"May result in temporary ban" isn't convincing. And it's not minors, it will be 22-year-olds at their first elite championship that find out they are XY with an androgen syndrome and have to show FINA their T levels from the past 10 years to demonstrate they didn't experience any part of a male puberty.
Have there been any elite athletes in the past felt to have 46 XY DSD CAIS?
IIRC a recent Olympics was said to have had "several" CAIS individuals competing. I believe Brazil had a volleyball player. (I could be wrong--it was a while back.)
CAIS individuals do tend to have greater height than the female average, which by itself can be an advantage in some sports, but OTOH *complete* AIS people have setbacks in other ways. The problem is differentiating CAIS from PAIS.
IIRC a recent Olympics was said to have had "several" CAIS individuals competing. I believe Brazil had a volleyball player. (I could be wrong--it was a while back.)
I haven't got a problem with genetic testing, it's the consequences of it. The binary definition they are applying and the requirements they are placing on athletes will affect more women than trans and intersex participation will.
I'm mostly on board with this, but when it comes to casual competition I think it's fine for trans women to compete, and I want them to be included. But when it comes to large sums of money (maybe $1000+), it's unfair. Glad FINA is trying to push for some compromise, which is very necessary for this polarizing subject.
Let’s be clear what you are proposing is not just unfair (and at every level not just when $$ are involved) it’s discriminatory towards cis women on a protected ground. If the originators of some of the early policy papers on “chosen gender” aka gender identity in sport had actually acknowledged the colliding rights issue and attempted to balance it instead of explicitly announcing they were going to ignore the negative impact on cis women then we’d all be farther along in the conversation. Now when we raise concerns we get lectured to shut up and try harder. In my books that’s abusive gaslighting given the current state of the scientific research (especially at the non elite level).
I'm a 300lb 1m 95cm bodybuilder. I hereby challenge Bartholomew Maxwell to a boxing match. I identify as a flyweight, so it's a fair match up, no excuses. Now man up and accept my challenge.
This argument actually supports transathletes competing with their identifying gender.
A 300lbs boxer can literally transition to a lighter weight boxer by losing weight and become a flyweight. They are not banned from competing based on what they USED to be.
Likewise, a male should be able to transition to female, which is something that happens every day in society, and compete as a female. They should not be banned from competing based on what they USED to be.
He was being overtly silly. You're being covertly silly.
well, the only thing I will add is that if a parent is ok with transitioning their child 12 or younger that is pretty messed up. And when I say transition I meanpuberty blockers, surgery, etc.
On the contrary I was planning on my 7 year old son competing in swimming, going trans, and toppling Lia Thomas' records. Now with this new rule change we will need to plan to transition him around 11 years 10 months to be sure we get in under the deadline.
Are you going to do the transforming at home to save some money? All you really need is some garden shears and a one inch hole saw for your drill.
I disagree. They can compete in the men's category, or local races can also create an "open" category. My 2nd place podium spot in a Turkey trot means just as much to me, as it does to them. Why is their chance to win a podium spot more important than mine?
Agree. I'm so sick of being told that girls and women should accept an unfair situation because it will hurt somebody's feelings or mental health. Fairness matters in youth sports and every level of competition.
I haven't got a problem with genetic testing, it's the consequences of it. The binary definition they are applying and the requirements they are placing on athletes will affect more women than trans and intersex participation will.
"The binary definition they are applying?" What can you possibly mean by this? Sex is binary. If they want to implement science-based rules, they have to recognize the binary nature of sex.
