Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So if an intersex man has a descended penis and ovaries, is he then a woman?

Well, that person would most likely have the 46, XX Intersex condition, and yes, with XX chromosomes, that person would be a woman.

Everyone has to have a hobby, but surely you could find a different one than policing people based on their chromosomes and genitalia? Maybe knitting?

Exactly. If I want to say that I am a hummingbird, who are you to question me? Why on earth would my DNA matter? Why would you police me? Go back to your knitting, you genetic policers!

Are you posting on this thread as a diversion from your usual activity posting on threads about transgender people?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So if an intersex man has a descended penis and ovaries, is he then a woman?

Well, that person would most likely have the 46, XX Intersex condition, and yes, with XX chromosomes, that person would be a woman.

Everyone has to have a hobby, but surely you could find a different one than policing people based on their chromosomes and genitalia? Maybe knitting?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So if an intersex man has a descended penis and ovaries, is he then a woman?

Well, that person would most likely have the 46, XX Intersex condition, and yes, with XX chromosomes, that person would be a woman.

Everyone has to have a hobby, but surely you could find a different one than policing people based on their chromosomes and genitalia? Maybe knitting?

Exactly. If I want to say that I am a hummingbird, who are you to question me? Why on earth would my DNA matter? Why would you police me? Go back to your knitting, you genetic policers!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So if an intersex man has a descended penis and ovaries, is he then a woman?

Well, that person would most likely have the 46, XX Intersex condition, and yes, with XX chromosomes, that person would be a woman.

Everyone has to have a hobby, but surely you could find a different one than policing people based on their chromosomes and genitalia? Maybe knitting?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

She competed her whole life with no notion of being high testosterone while living, believing, and presenting as a woman.The fact that she can no longer compete because of a freak of nature is what is not fair.

We are wielding "science" as a cudgel and that is not fair. She cannot control who she is. Young female gymnasts who delay puberty and menstruation CAN, but THEY are allowed to compete.

But honestly. F@#$ the Olympics and any whiney athlete who is upset at this.

Sorry but she presents as a man

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

She competed her whole life with no notion of being high testosterone while living, believing, and presenting as a woman.The fact that she can no longer compete because of a freak of nature is what is not fair.

We are wielding "science" as a cudgel and that is not fair. She cannot control who she is. Young female gymnasts who delay puberty and menstruation CAN, but THEY are allowed to compete.

But honestly. F@#$ the Olympics and any whiney athlete who is upset at this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So if an intersex man has a descended penis and ovaries, is he then a woman?

Well, that person would most likely have the 46, XX Intersex condition, and yes, with XX chromosomes, that person would be a woman.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

And your definition is . . . ?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So if an intersex man has a descended penis and ovaries, is he then a woman?

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.

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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.