Caster Semenya Loses Appeal

minong wrote:

Requiring someone to take drugs to compete is wrong. Having an intersex person compete against females is wrong. Allow the intersex person to choose either the male or female race to run in and award the intersex winner and male/female winner (along with other podium finishers of course). This doesn't have to be that complicated.

Sounds reasonable.

But then why are we celebrating Kipchoge's Marathon "World Record" when the actual record for a man completing a Marathon course is 1:28:57?

Thanks

Alan

A victory for the 99.99% wrote:

Hopefully we can all agree that we shouldn't discriminate based on gender differences in society at large, but allowing Semenya to compete with women when her hormones are biologically different from almost all other women was damaging to the integrity of women's athletics. Expect Semenya to move up to the 5000 where the rules don't apply. It will probably only take a year or 2 for her to compete with the best of the best women at that distance given her biological advantage.

in

You expect her to compete in the 5000? Her PR is 16:05. The best women in the world are running low 14. I doubt she could ever run under 15.

Not An Expert wrote:

Caster Defender wrote:

Caster Semenya is not a man, and it is hateful and ignorant to say so. Caster Semenya is a woman with different hormone levels. She is a woman who does not conform to your standards of beauty, who looks different from the women you are used to seeing. That does not give you the right to be a bully.

+1. I think there has been some moderation in this thread already. Use the “report button” to help them find and delete this post, too. Bullying like this should always be unacceptable on the boards.

"Different hormone levels"? That's not really getting the argument by the balls, is it?

No way nope wrote:

Cousin Ernie wrote:

I feel sorry for her.

Why? She will move up in distance and probably compete at a very competitive level there (see the SA 5k finals). It isn't just a testosterone advantage - it is all of the other physical advantages as well that are there and have developed in part because of the testosterone. Honestly the suppression should be for any distance although this ruling is an excellent step forward.

So are they going to test ALL females or just ones that win and look a certain way. Its' clear this ruling was just to target Caster and to a lessor extent Niyonsaba

That's where I think the ruling has problems. Unless they are willing to test all athletes for natural testosterone levels then it won't mean anything .

Perry Mason wrote:

The correct ruling.

It's a ridiculous ruling, which allows males to continue competing against women

in women's events. Testosterone is just one of myriad differences between the

sexes, and requiring hormonal manipulation is crude and dangerous.

Political correctness is both deranging and stultifying our institutions.

Dr Logic Calling wrote:

minong wrote:

Requiring someone to take drugs to compete is wrong. Having an intersex person compete against females is wrong. Allow the intersex person to choose either the male or female race to run in and award the intersex winner and male/female winner (along with other podium finishers of course). This doesn't have to be that complicated.

Sounds reasonable.

But then why are we celebrating Kipchoge's Marathon "World Record" when the actual record for a man completing a Marathon course is 1:28:57?

Thanks

Alan

I'm only addressing what should constitute a fair and ethical competition. What someone decides to enjoy and celebrate as a fan of sport is up to them.

Crazy decision. just because caster has a bit higher testosterone level. I await the banning of any women that is taller than the average woman in womens basketball

crazyworld wrote:

Crazy decision. just because caster has a bit higher testosterone level. I await the banning of any women that is taller than the average woman in womens basketball

False analogy. Height is not the product of testes; Semenya's testosterone levels are.

crazyworld wrote:

Crazy decision. just because caster has a bit higher testosterone level. I await the banning of any women that is taller than the average woman in womens basketball

I've seen these analogies for years and they're completely nonsensical. Unless you're willing to suggest a better competition structure than separating male and female competitors by chromosome it's delusional to think there won't be differences within that sex. But again, 99% of people are just parroting some BS they found on twitter or some website that supports their presuppositions on a particular topic.

Trolling forecast wrote:

The forecast is for a tsunami of trolling and as many people as possible referring to Caster as 'he' and/or saying 'internal testes' which some folks seem to get some kind of perverse kick out of. Normal decent people - time to take (yet another) break from this wretched place.

Bye ?

(We all know you’re not going anywhere.)

Caster Defender wrote:

Sprintgeezer wrote:

“Caster Semenya Loses Appeal”

—As though he ever had any.

Caster Semenya is not a man, and it is hateful and ignorant to say so. Caster Semenya is a woman with different hormone levels. She is a woman who does not conform to your standards of beauty, who looks different from the women you are used to seeing. That does not give you the right to be a bully.

If you bothered to read the text accompanying the decision, you would learn that Caster is 46 XY DSD. Which means she is genetically male and was undermasculinised during fetal development. She has normal testes which are undescended, but which excrete normal levels of testosterone. However, a genetic absence of receptors for androgens in target tissues, (where male genitalia normally develop), means that s she developed female-like external genitalia instead.

A sad case, no doubt. But genetically, she has clear biologically male advantages. Even with reducing her testosterone, she has still developed into adulthood with that hormonal boost.

.

minong wrote:

Dr Logic Calling wrote:

Sounds reasonable.

But then why are we celebrating Kipchoge's Marathon "World Record" when the actual record for a man completing a Marathon course is 1:28:57?

Thanks

Alan

I'm only addressing what should constitute a fair and ethical competition. What someone decides to enjoy and celebrate as a fan of sport is up to them.

I think perhaps you missed my point when using the term "celebrate". To put it another way, why is it ok for Kipchoge to accept the London Marathon Men's Winner cheque when the fastest man on the day completely the course in 1:33:38?

It's only concerned fair and ethical here because the "real winner" accepts they are in a different category. Complications arise when they do not.

Cheers

Alan

minong wrote:

crazyworld wrote:

Crazy decision. just because caster has a bit higher testosterone level. I await the banning of any women that is taller than the average woman in womens basketball

I've seen these analogies for years and they're completely nonsensical. Unless you're willing to suggest a better competition structure than separating male and female competitors by chromosome it's delusional to think there won't be differences within that sex. But again, 99% of people are just parroting some BS they found on twitter or some website that supports their presuppositions on a particular topic.

These analogies are completely correct. someone who is 1,50 m tall has probably a larger disadvantage in basketball than someone with lower testosterone. You also did not provide a single argument why I would be wrong. You just labelling something bs without providing any argument. good job

milermb wrote:

Never been called a a"liberal" before. Actually quite insulted by this description, I consider myself a rock solid Socialist, class struggle an' all that!

Seriously, there must be hundreds of thousands of people biologically similar to Semenya in the world. She is the only one of them who has won gold medals. Why/ Because she has trained seriously and methodically for years to get to the level she is currently at. If it was clear that she did very little or no training and simply turned up at the big races, laced on a pair of spikes and won the race without trying then you could say she is destroying the sport. But that's not what has happened over the last decade or so. She has worked for her success- maybe with some genetic advantages y definition great athletes are exceptional physical specimens!

Nice slight of hand there. Yes, she was the only "one of them" who won a gold medal at the Rio Olympics. However, silver and bronze in that race were also won by DSD athletes. That's a podium full...

.

The hostility towards Semenya is really big. She is the goat and logically slow americans are trying to attack here. Strangely they never wanted to check on lance Armstrong

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Angelo Mysterioso wrote:

I don't understand why they said that she can compete in other events.

Why did they say she only has to reduce her T levels to compete in the 400m thru Mile?

Can anyone explain?

Makes no sense. It should be in all events. My suspicion is that for some reason, they think that the added testosterone confers no benefit while training and competing at longer distances. Utter BS, I'd love to see the scientific studies that support that decision. But at least they had the sense to limit it at the mile or below.

The burden is on IAAF to prove that added testosterone is a benefit in other events. The IAAF's study and data indicates that is where they can prove a benefit.

Dr Logic Calling wrote:

minong wrote:

I'm only addressing what should constitute a fair and ethical competition. What someone decides to enjoy and celebrate as a fan of sport is up to them.

I think perhaps you missed my point when using the term "celebrate". To put it another way, why is it ok for Kipchoge to accept the London Marathon Men's Winner cheque when the fastest man on the day completely the course in 1:33:38?

It's only concerned fair and ethical here because the "real winner" accepts they are in a different category. Complications arise when they do not.

Cheers

Alan

Last reply because you're now making my point for me. The wheelchair winner won the race, Kipchoge won the race. Everyone is accepting of that. We should do the same with male/female/intersex runners. Again, it doesn't have to be complicated.

Which one from the article is Semenya? Complete or partial androgen insensitivity syndrome, or 5 ard?

minong wrote:

Dr Logic Calling wrote:

I think perhaps you missed my point when using the term "celebrate". To put it another way, why is it ok for Kipchoge to accept the London Marathon Men's Winner cheque when the fastest man on the day completely the course in 1:33:38?

It's only concerned fair and ethical here because the "real winner" accepts they are in a different category. Complications arise when they do not.

Cheers

Alan

Last reply because you're now making my point for me. The wheelchair winner won the race, Kipchoge won the race. Everyone is accepting of that. We should do the same with male/female/intersex runners. Again, it doesn't have to be complicated.

Alas it appears you have missed my point again! Which was:-

It is indeed complicated because using this as an analogy, Semenya does not accept that she is the wheelchair race winner, she wants to have Kipchoge's cheque and anything less is just discriminatory.

I hope this makes it clear for you to understand this time because I am certainly not making your point for you. I was simply pointing out that you were talking absolute rubbish when claiming complications could be avoided here.

Cheers

Alan