Anonymous
Post 09/05/2016 17:38     Subject: I disagree with the decision to let Semenya and Chand compete
The great Malcolm Gladwell did a great piece on this:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/caster-semenya-and-the-logic-of-olympic-competition
Anonymous
Post 09/05/2016 17:34     Subject: I disagree with the decision to let Semenya and Chand compete
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Swimming: not a good comparison. The only divisions are men and women.

Running: If there is a division, there has to be a way to determine it and, if necessary, examine for it.

For nearly all competitors, a standard cheek swab and drug-test-like exam would (I think) be enough to determine if the genetic makeup is XX and if testosterone levels are in the normal range.

Then if these two tests indicate something unusual, other diagnostics (ultrasound, other) would be called in. These diagnostics would only be needed for a small minority of competitors.

Of course, I would also support very transparent rules and the idea that serious competitors would be tested early in their careers so as not to be surprised.


...but WHY is testosterone the defining factor here? It seems like this is a "rule" meant to harass women who are insufficiently feminine while leaving all of the other genetic "freaks" alone. Most Olympic calibre athletes are weird in some way, but the only folks being subjected to humiliating testing are women of color from poor countries.


NP here, why would you think only certain people signing up for female events would be singled out? This seems akin to weighing everyone participating in sports divided by weight class; requiring birth certificates for people entering events segregated by age (eg, no 16yo trying to pass as 12yo in little league World Series), etc. BTW in the case of xxy, participating and winning in a men's competition *could* make the xxy person the first female to win a men's title.
Anonymous
Post 09/05/2016 17:16     Subject: I disagree with the decision to let Semenya and Chand compete
Agreed. There is no way it is fair with that level of testosterone
Anonymous
Post 09/05/2016 16:58     Subject: Re:I disagree with the decision to let Semenya and Chand compete
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:sex is a spectrum


This is not true. There are two sexes- females, the sex class that can produce relatively large gametes (eggs) and males, the sex class that can produce relatively smaller gametes (sperm). A small percentage of the population has an intersex condition, the prevalence of which is estimated between 0.5 to 1.7% of the overall population. Sometimes (in 0.5 percent of the human species) this results in ambiguous genitalia. Sometimes this results in infertility, physical abnormality, or another issue. Sometimes it doesn't cause much of a problem at all. Intersex is a genetic condition or mutation, which is not a judgment value- merely an acknowledgement of biological reality.

The existence of people with intersex conditions doesn't mean that there is a third sex, that there are more than two sexes, or that sex is a spectrum- just as the existence of people lacking one more or more legs from birth does not mean that humans aren't a bipedal species, or that "pedalism is a spectrum."


I am this poster (16:48) and I want to correct a typo in this post. The estimate incidence of ambiguous genitalia is .05% of the overall population, not .5% as previously stated.
Anonymous
Post 09/05/2016 16:48     Subject: Re:I disagree with the decision to let Semenya and Chand compete
Anonymous wrote:sex is a spectrum


This is not true. There are two sexes- females, the sex class that can produce relatively large gametes (eggs) and males, the sex class that can produce relatively smaller gametes (sperm). A small percentage of the population has an intersex condition, the prevalence of which is estimated between 0.5 to 1.7% of the overall population. Sometimes (in 0.5 percent of the human species) this results in ambiguous genitalia. Sometimes this results in infertility, physical abnormality, or another issue. Sometimes it doesn't cause much of a problem at all. Intersex is a genetic condition or mutation, which is not a judgment value- merely an acknowledgement of biological reality.

The existence of people with intersex conditions doesn't mean that there is a third sex, that there are more than two sexes, or that sex is a spectrum- just as the existence of people lacking one more or more legs from birth does not mean that humans aren't a bipedal species, or that "pedalism is a spectrum."
Anonymous
Post 09/05/2016 15:04     Subject: I disagree with the decision to let Semenya and Chand compete
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why not disallow freakishly tall people from playing basketball or freakishly tiny people from gymnastic because they have a genetic advantage, too?


Exactly. Why is this so hard to understand? Everyone at the Olympics is exceptional, many because of biology. You're just squeamish because you can identify some specific abnormality that might be helping her. Most sprinters have an OD of fast twitch muscles. Why not ban them too for their genetic "abnormality" and give us "normal" athletes a chance?


You're being disingenuous.

Allowing intersex athletes to compete affects only women athletes, not all Olympic athletes.

Semenya did nothing wrong, I agree, but with undescended testes and much higher testosterone she has an unfair advantage over women who were born without testes. And yes, testosterone DOES make that much of a difference, as one PP it is a tested-for substance.