Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all arguing over intersex are missing the point. The ruling is for testosterone level. If she was confirmed intersex but had the “normal” level of testosterone, she would be fine. She was tested by IAAF years ago and they went ahead and let her continue on in women’s sports. So it has nothing to do with whether she is genetically a man or woman (XX or XY).

But it’s all BS anyway because testosterone is not a male hormone. It is in both men and women. Having higher amounts of testosterone doesn’t make you a man. I think it’s ludicrous. No way could she even come close to competing with men. But because she’s better than most women runners we need to police that? GTFO.

Having testes does.

Oh really? That’s the official definition of a man?

Anonymous wrote:The ruling specifically applies to athletes with 46XY DSD, i.e. female athletes with XY (male) chromosomes. If she wasn't intersex, the ruling wouldn't apply to her and no one would be talking about this.

More specifically it applies to female athletes competing in certain events in certain sports.

The decision was fair.

Not everyone gets to be involved in everything all the time just because they want too. And it doesn't matter that its genetics. Genetics excludes people. It's reality.

Anonymous wrote:You all arguing over intersex are missing the point. The ruling is for testosterone level. If she was confirmed intersex but had the “normal” level of testosterone, she would be fine. She was tested by IAAF years ago and they went ahead and let her continue on in women’s sports. So it has nothing to do with whether she is genetically a man or woman (XX or XY).

But it’s all BS anyway because testosterone is not a male hormone. It is in both men and women. Having higher amounts of testosterone doesn’t make you a man. I think it’s ludicrous. No way could she even come close to competing with men. But because she’s better than most women runners we need to police that? GTFO.

Ok I take most of this back-after reading what pp linked it’s clear it was my understanding that was faulty. However, I stand by my opinion that just because she has higher testosterone doesn’t mean she is advantaged, male, or should be doped down to “normal” levels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If she has the intersex condition she is understood to have, then she has external "girl parts", and internal "boy parts", and XY chromosomes. That is not a biological woman.

A person with XY chromosomes isn't a biological woman if you define "a biological woman" as "a person with XX chromosomes", but why would you do that? Especially in the context of athletic contests, which do not require athletes to be karyotyped before they are allowed to compete.

Also, aside from her blood testosterone levels, this is how much medical information you have about her: ZERO.

Um, because that's the basic definition of male and female? Men have XY chromosomes and have male characteristics and women have XX chromosomes and develop female characteristics. What is your definition if not that?

Except for when that doesn't apply.

Aside from intersex conditions, when does this not apply?

That's like saying, "Aside from when the sun shines while it's raining, when does the statement "the sun doesn't shine when it's raining" apply?"

Anonymous wrote:You all arguing over intersex are missing the point. The ruling is for testosterone level. If she was confirmed intersex but had the “normal” level of testosterone, she would be fine. She was tested by IAAF years ago and they went ahead and let her continue on in women’s sports. So it has nothing to do with whether she is genetically a man or woman (XX or XY).

But it’s all BS anyway because testosterone is not a male hormone. It is in both men and women. Having higher amounts of testosterone doesn’t make you a man. I think it’s ludicrous. No way could she even come close to competing with men. But because she’s better than most women runners we need to police that? GTFO.

Having testes does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling specifically applies to athletes with 46XY DSD, i.e. female athletes with XY (male) chromosomes. If she wasn't intersex, the ruling wouldn't apply to her and no one would be talking about this.

Citation please?

Sorry, I saw the citation.

"The DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to athletes with “46 XY DSD” – i.e.
conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes. Accordingly, individuals with XX
chromosomes are not subject to any restrictions or eligibility conditions under the DSD Regulations."

In other words: if you're this kind of woman, you can have any testosterone level you want, but if you're that kind of woman, you have to alter your body if you want to be allowed to compete.

That's even worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If she has the intersex condition she is understood to have, then she has external "girl parts", and internal "boy parts", and XY chromosomes. That is not a biological woman.

A person with XY chromosomes isn't a biological woman if you define "a biological woman" as "a person with XX chromosomes", but why would you do that? Especially in the context of athletic contests, which do not require athletes to be karyotyped before they are allowed to compete.

Also, aside from her blood testosterone levels, this is how much medical information you have about her: ZERO.

Um, because that's the basic definition of male and female? Men have XY chromosomes and have male characteristics and women have XX chromosomes and develop female characteristics. What is your definition if not that?

Except for when that doesn't apply.

Aside from intersex conditions, when does this not apply?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling specifically applies to athletes with 46XY DSD, i.e. female athletes with XY (male) chromosomes. If she wasn't intersex, the ruling wouldn't apply to her and no one would be talking about this.

Citation please?

From

- https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/05/what-no-one-i...emenya-she-has-xy-chromosomes/

"It was generally accepted by people following the case closely that Semenya was XY, but now it’s been confirmed as fact since the CAS press release specifically says, “The DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to athletes with ’46 XY DSD’ – i.e. conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes.” If she wasn’t XY, the IAAF’s regulations wouldn’t apply to her and she’d have no reason to challenge them."

And from the Court of Arbitration for Sport release at https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Medi..._Semenya_ASA_IAAF_decision.pdf :

In March/April 2018, the IAAF cancelled its “Hyperandrogenism Regulations”, which had been
primarily challenged by the Indian athlete Dutee Chand, and replaced them with the DSD Regulations
establishing new requirements governing the eligibility of women with DSD for the female
classification in race events from 400m to 1 mile (the “Restricted Events”) at international athletics
competitions. The DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to athletes with “46 XY DSD” – i.e.
conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes. Accordingly, individuals with XX
chromosomes are not subject to any restrictions or eligibility conditions under the DSD Regulations.

You all arguing over intersex are missing the point. The ruling is for testosterone level. If she was confirmed intersex but had the “normal” level of testosterone, she would be fine. She was tested by IAAF years ago and they went ahead and let her continue on in women’s sports. So it has nothing to do with whether she is genetically a man or woman (XX or XY).

But it’s all BS anyway because testosterone is not a male hormone. It is in both men and women. Having higher amounts of testosterone doesn’t make you a man. I think it’s ludicrous. No way could she even come close to competing with men. But because she’s better than most women runners we need to police that? GTFO.

Anonymous wrote:The ruling specifically applies to athletes with 46XY DSD, i.e. female athletes with XY (male) chromosomes. If she wasn't intersex, the ruling wouldn't apply to her and no one would be talking about this.

Citation please?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If she has the intersex condition she is understood to have, then she has external "girl parts", and internal "boy parts", and XY chromosomes. That is not a biological woman.

A person with XY chromosomes isn't a biological woman if you define "a biological woman" as "a person with XX chromosomes", but why would you do that? Especially in the context of athletic contests, which do not require athletes to be karyotyped before they are allowed to compete.

Also, aside from her blood testosterone levels, this is how much medical information you have about her: ZERO.

Um, because that's the basic definition of male and female? Men have XY chromosomes and have male characteristics and women have XX chromosomes and develop female characteristics. What is your definition if not that?

Except for when that doesn't apply.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She could also just be hyper androgenic without being intersex. The fact is, WE DON' KNOW.

I'd we start going down a path of genetic testing for Olympic athletes...wow.

So that whole East German doping of women was totes cool with you then?

I'm sorry, did these women who were forced steroids and testosterone have genetic testing to discover it? And since they had to take artificial drugs to achieve those results as opposed to being born a certain way, I don't think you're comparing the same things here

The ruling specifically applies to athletes with 46XY DSD, i.e. female athletes with XY (male) chromosomes. If she wasn't intersex, the ruling wouldn't apply to her and no one would be talking about this.

Again, from what I've read, the decision is premature. But people are getting the facts wrong. The decision was NOT based JUST on testosterone levels. There are NO restrictions on testosterone levels for a woman with XX chromosomes. The restrictions on testosterone levels apply ONLY to women with XY chromosomes.

From

- https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/05/what-no-one-is-telling-you-about-caster-semenya-she-has-xy-chromosomes/

"It was generally accepted by people following the case closely that Semenya was XY, but now it’s been confirmed as fact since the CAS press release specifically says, “The DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to athletes with ’46 XY DSD’ – i.e. conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes.” If she wasn’t XY, the IAAF’s regulations wouldn’t apply to her and she’d have no reason to challenge them."

And from the Court of Arbitration for Sport release at https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release_Semenya_ASA_IAAF_decision.pdf :

In March/April 2018, the IAAF cancelled its “Hyperandrogenism Regulations”, which had been
primarily challenged by the Indian athlete Dutee Chand, and replaced them with the DSD Regulations
establishing new requirements governing the eligibility of women with DSD for the female
classification in race events from 400m to 1 mile (the “Restricted Events”) at international athletics
competitions. The DSD covered by the Regulations are limited to athletes with “46 XY DSD” – i.e.
conditions where the affected individual has XY chromosomes. Accordingly, individuals with XX
chromosomes are not subject to any restrictions or eligibility conditions under the DSD Regulations.

Anonymous wrote:She could also just be hyper androgenic without being intersex. The fact is, WE DON' KNOW.

I'd we start going down a path of genetic testing for Olympic athletes...wow.

So that whole East German doping of women was totes cool with you then?