The IAAF fires back at Billie Jean King and the WSF: "Without limits, (women's sport) would cease to exist"

The IAAF release (which I've pasted above) is here:

https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-response-to-womens-sports-foundation-and

It's about time!

Women are being brainwashed by the media that this is almost somehow a good thing for women’s rights. I guess if they want full equality it is a good thing. But most people will be unhappy in a few years if wonen’s Sports cease to exist. Once the NCAA rolls over, all scholarships will go to men claiming to be women.

There are a number of women just like Caster currently competing in NCAA athletics and have been numerous ones in the past. Don't be naïve enough to think that Caster is a lone, isolated individual (and yes, a lot of US athletes would be affected as well). The only difference is now the IAAF is trying to eliminate them from women's athletics. As far as those who were born with a penis competing in women's sports, that should not be allowed.

It is very possible that Billie Jean King is intersex.

comedyrelief wrote:

There are a number of women just like Caster currently competing in NCAA athletics and have been numerous ones in the past. Don't be naïve enough to think that Caster is a lone, isolated individual (and yes, a lot of US athletes would be affected as well). The only difference is now the IAAF is trying to eliminate them from women's athletics. As far as those who were born with a penis competing in women's sports, that should not be allowed.

What if the XY person identified as female for as long as can be remembered?

Finally, they seem to be taking a hard line on this.

Their original sin was the hormone treatment angle. That idea needs to be completely scrapped. Those who aren't women aren't magically made women by hormone treatments. Handicapping is not the answer.

I think if they had not allowed the hormone treatments and had just straight out made DSD/intersex individuals ineligible for the female category, the Chand case would have never been lost. Appearing to make people take drugs that probably make them less healthy just isn't a good look.

baseball-02 wrote:

Finally, they seem to be taking a hard line on this.

Their original sin was the hormone treatment angle. That idea needs to be completely scrapped. Those who aren't women aren't magically made women by hormone treatments. Handicapping is not the answer.

I think if they had not allowed the hormone treatments and had just straight out made DSD/intersex individuals ineligible for the female category, the Chand case would have never been lost. Appearing to make people take drugs that probably make them less healthy just isn't a good look.

Making a completely separate intersex category or making intersex athletes compete with men would be even worse.

Things are progressing in the right direction, but too slowly. Make no mistake, this is not yet over.

Women always get the shaft. Real women, that is. I really feel for all of them who had to compete in this b.s. era.

Again, the real point is being missed by the IAAF. They crow about inclusion and sport for all in their branding, yet they do not provide (and show no intent to provide) a safe, competitive place for individuals identifying in non-traditional ways.

Advocates for sport inclusion are not saying let's destroy the Women's category -- what they are saying is let's create categories and arenas so that all people can express themselves athletically. And please, please, do not separate sport from culture...it is part of culture and society, and is not some kind of traditionally defined incubator away from society.

And of course the duplicity and clumsiness of IAAF policy remains: the targeted T-rule will be struck down as it is unfair (does the IAAF really think that there are no individuals competing in the throws events that are not high T? :()

I am a transgender woman (MTF) (and longtime competitive runner) and FULLY support this move. Even though this ruling seems to be aimed at runners with intersex or androgen receptor mutations, I think the principle holds true for trans women as well.

Also, from talking with other trans women, the majority of us agree that it is unfair to allow trans women to compete against genetic women. It is only a vocal minority which are pushing for trans or intersex women to be able to compete against genetic women, and the vast majority of us realize it is unfair.

This is because a lot of trans women like me suffer from what is called "gender-dysphoria" meaning we hate the fact that we have permanent male secondary sex characteristics due to puberty (i.e. broad shoulders, large hands and feet, higher muscle mass, low voices), and most of these changes don't go away despite 5+ years of hormone replacement therapy (i.e. decreasing testosterone and increasing estrogen levels). But we recognize that those characteristics, especially the permanent ones like bone structure and muscle mass, give an advantage to MTF trans women even after taking gender affirming hormones like estrogen. Especially at high level competition where every second counts, those small percentage gains add up.

However, the positive message I always tell other trans women is that this doesn't mean trans people should be excluded from sport entirely. I still love running with friends, compete on the roads against both men and women (in the M category), and potentially even coaching in the future. Overall, runners are a pretty accepting group and I feel like trans people can still be involved (especially on the roads when all compete at the same time),

Anyways, thought I would add my perspective as a transgender woman.

Trans Runner is being way too reasonable.

"Making a completely separate intersex category or making intersex athletes compete with men would be even worse."

Just don't humiliate people. It's too late to say their ineligible when they win the women's 800m World Championship going away. It has to be done before that. Probably still paying for the horrible way Ewa Klobukowska was treated 50 years ago.

An intersex category is not needed, these athletes just become like most of the rest of us. Not world class, not professional.

Thanks Trans Runner for your input. You are a key stakeholder that needs to be heard from in this debate.

I will, however, refrain from agreeing with your point below:

"Also, from talking with other trans women, the majority of us agree that it is unfair to allow trans women to compete against genetic women. It is only a vocal minority which are pushing for trans or intersex women to be able to compete against genetic women, and the vast majority of us realize it is unfair."

The size of the group that requires inclusion is yet to be determined. That is why the IAAF needs to invite all stakeholders to a conference where these types of issues are discussed.

galenruppisgod wrote:

comedyrelief wrote:

There are a number of women just like Caster currently competing in NCAA athletics and have been numerous ones in the past. Don't be naïve enough to think that Caster is a lone, isolated individual (and yes, a lot of US athletes would be affected as well). The only difference is now the IAAF is trying to eliminate them from women's athletics. As far as those who were born with a penis competing in women's sports, that should not be allowed.

What if the XY person identified as female for as long as can be remembered?

How is the penis of any relevance whatsoever?

If the person has testosterone in the female range and has none of the qualities that make men better then women, what does the penis have to do with anything?

External testes are a different matter. They produce testosterone. The penis does nothing.

ex-runner wrote:

galenruppisgod wrote:

What if the XY person identified as female for as long as can be remembered?

How is the penis of any relevance whatsoever?

If the person has testosterone in the female range and has none of the qualities that make men better then women, what does the penis have to do with anything?

External testes are a different matter. They produce testosterone. The penis does nothing.

I don't know if you're serious...penis/external testes, same thing. It has to do with categories. Obviously said person with penis might have inherent qualities that give advantages despite the lower testosterone.

IAAF said it: women's sport is a restricted category and without limits it ceases to exist. The bullies on the left have won. We now "know" it is an artificial category because we have become incapable of defining "woman" except as a self-declared social characteristic. Let the restricted category wither away, as it must as long as we are afraid to say that "man" and "woman" are more than merely social constructs.

galenruppisgod wrote:

I don't know if you're serious...penis/external testes, same thing. It has to do with categories. Obviously said person with penis might have inherent qualities that give advantages despite the lower testosterone.

I know this isn't what we are discussing but just want to point out that this here is where people would have differing opinions. I, for one, do not think having a penis should disqualify someone if they are well within hormonal limits of testosterone (and have been that way for preceding years.) It isn't the penis which determines the advantages, it is the testes, be they internal or external.

I think it’s great that the IAAF issued this statement. But, do they seriously think that high T individuals don’t have an advantage over women in events other than 400 through the mile? They’ll kill women’s athletics in the shorter sprints, distance, and field events without regulation.