Caster Semenya admits she has an advantage, but dismisses it by adding "so what?"

I am Sam wrote:

Problem is the 99% of people who do not care about athletics, and even most of those who do, do not understand the issue.

People know by now that 'she' has high testosterone, looks masculine etc, but very few know that he is actually 46 XY DSD, no female reproductive organs and un-descended testes.

So the support for IAAF etc is not there. And IAAF itself has not addressed this properly. Quit trying to set testosterone limits and chemical inhibitions. Just make the categories absolutely clear:

The two categories are people born male or female as determined by genetic make up.

You are free to identify as whatever you want, but you are not free to cross over those two categories.

If you do that and the general public ask "so why can't 'she ' run with the females", the answer, "because he is 46 XY with DSD", i.e. he is a bloke with sexual organ disability , will allow people to say "ok...now that makes sense, I though she was just 'blokey'.

No, 'she' is not blokey...he is a bloke

StopMisgenerdingPeople wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Problem is the 99% of people who do not care about athletics, and even most of those who do, do not understand the issue.

People know by now that 'she' has high testosterone, looks masculine etc, but very few know that he is actually 46 XY DSD, no female reproductive organs and un-descended testes.

So the support for IAAF etc is not there. And IAAF itself has not addressed this properly. Quit trying to set testosterone limits and chemical inhibitions. Just make the categories absolutely clear:

The two categories are people born male or female as determined by genetic make up.

You are free to identify as whatever you want, but you are not free to cross over those two categories.

If you do that and the general public ask "so why can't 'she ' run with the females", the answer, "because he is 46 XY with DSD", i.e. he is a bloke with sexual organ disability , will allow people to say "ok...now that makes sense, I though she was just 'blokey'.

No, 'she' is not blokey...he is a bloke

No, she is XY. We can call it the XX division and ban women who are XY from competing in the XX division. But please stop calling her a dude, you are just being an a$$hole when you do that. She is a female, born XY, can you please stop misgendering her. Thank you.

StopMisgenerdingPeople wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Problem is the 99% of people who do not care about athletics, and even most of those who do, do not understand the issue.

People know by now that 'she' has high testosterone, looks masculine etc, but very few know that he is actually 46 XY DSD, no female reproductive organs and un-descended testes.

So the support for IAAF etc is not there. And IAAF itself has not addressed this properly. Quit trying to set testosterone limits and chemical inhibitions. Just make the categories absolutely clear:

The two categories are people born male or female as determined by genetic make up.

You are free to identify as whatever you want, but you are not free to cross over those two categories.

If you do that and the general public ask "so why can't 'she ' run with the females", the answer, "because he is 46 XY with DSD", i.e. he is a bloke with sexual organ disability , will allow people to say "ok...now that makes sense, I though she was just 'blokey'.

No, 'she' is not blokey...he is a bloke

No, she is XY. We can call it the XX division and ban women who are XY from competing in the XX division. But please stop calling her a dude, you are just being an a$$hole when you do that. She is a female, born XY, can you please stop misgendering her. Thank you.

I am Sam wrote:

StopMisgenerdingPeople wrote:

No, she is XY. We can call it the XX division and ban women who are XY from competing in the XX division. But please stop calling her a dude, you are just being an a$$hole when you do that. She is a female, born XY, can you please stop misgendering her. Thank you.

Stop 'mis-sexing' him.

'She' was born as an XY male, unfortunately with un-descended testes (and no female rep organs). Despite those around him 'misgendering' him as female, he chose to identity as a male when he was a kid.

Later, for whatever reason, lack of organs or greater performance compared to the female sex...you make up your mind, he decided to identify as a female gender.

OK, 'he' is now a 'she', but if we simply don't adhere to the classifications within athletics (male XY or female XY), we are continuing to deny the real sexually female athletes their rightful honours.

This has been dragging on for over 10 yrs and is bordering on a disgrace

StopMisgenerdingPeople wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Stop 'mis-sexing' him.

'She' was born as an XY male, unfortunately with un-descended testes (and no female rep organs). Despite those around him 'misgendering' him as female, he chose to identity as a male when he was a kid.

Later, for whatever reason, lack of organs or greater performance compared to the female sex...you make up your mind, he decided to identify as a female gender.

OK, 'he' is now a 'she', but if we simply don't adhere to the classifications within athletics (male XY or female XY), we are continuing to deny the real sexually female athletes their rightful honours.

This has been dragging on for over 10 yrs and is bordering on a disgrace

It is generally accepted practice in English that pronouns refer to a person's gender, not their biological sex. Her gender is female, please use female or gender nuetral pronouns, that is all I am saying. The word "dude" is not a biological word, and therefor she is not a dude. This is unrelated to whether she should be allowed to compete in the women's division of IAAF. I think no to that, I just want everyone to stop calling her names, which is what using male pronouns is doing.

rojo wrote:

Listen to the very end of this video:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/video/2019/aug/14/i-have-high-testosterone-so-what-says-caster-semenya-video

I'll repeat what I've always said about Caster. It must have been incredibly challenging to find out as a late teen that even though you didn't have a male sexual organ that you are XY and have no womb/ovaries, etc. I love how she's been strong and flexed and stood up for herself.

That being said, these comments don't exactly endear her to me. She misses the nuance of the argument.

She seems oblivious of the fact that she's "the best in the world" in a special cateogry - women's athletics. She's not the best in the world period. There are hundreds if not thousands of men better than her. In a day and age that we let people self identify their gender legally, we must have rules as to who can and can't compete in women's athletics.

StopMisgenerdingPeople wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Stop 'mis-sexing' him.

'She' was born as an XY male, unfortunately with un-descended testes (and no female rep organs). Despite those around him 'misgendering' him as female, he chose to identity as a male when he was a kid.

Later, for whatever reason, lack of organs or greater performance compared to the female sex...you make up your mind, he decided to identify as a female gender.

OK, 'he' is now a 'she', but if we simply don't adhere to the classifications within athletics (male XY or female XY), we are continuing to deny the real sexually female athletes their rightful honours.

This has been dragging on for over 10 yrs and is bordering on a disgrace

It is generally accepted practice in English that pronouns refer to a person's gender, not their biological sex. Her gender is female, please use female or gender nuetral pronouns, that is all I am saying. The word "dude" is not a biological word, and therefor she is not a dude. This is unrelated to whether she should be allowed to compete in the women's division of IAAF. I think no to that, I just want everyone to stop calling her names, which is what using male pronouns is doing.

StopMisgenerdingPeople wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Problem is the 99% of people who do not care about athletics, and even most of those who do, do not understand the issue.

People know by now that 'she' has high testosterone, looks masculine etc, but very few know that he is actually 46 XY DSD, no female reproductive organs and un-descended testes.

So the support for IAAF etc is not there. And IAAF itself has not addressed this properly. Quit trying to set testosterone limits and chemical inhibitions. Just make the categories absolutely clear:

The two categories are people born male or female as determined by genetic make up.

You are free to identify as whatever you want, but you are not free to cross over those two categories.

If you do that and the general public ask "so why can't 'she ' run with the females", the answer, "because he is 46 XY with DSD", i.e. he is a bloke with sexual organ disability , will allow people to say "ok...now that makes sense, I though she was just 'blokey'.

No, 'she' is not blokey...he is a bloke

No, she is XY. We can call it the XX division and ban women who are XY from competing in the XX division. But please stop calling her a dude, you are just being an a$$hole when you do that. She is a female, born XY, can you please stop misgendering her. Thank you.