IAAF to argue that Caster Semenya should classified as a “biological male" at CAS (Update: Semenya loses case) [See Staff Post]
- Thread starter Blue Lou
- Start date
I don't follow tennis, but.. I thought I once read in a different thread that she absolutely couldn't?
How about none of that and they just try their best and if that's not good enough then oh well, maybe next time.
it's just you always hear stories about girls competing and even winning against boys in high school wrestling
yet you never hear girls compete with men in wrestling at collegiate or olympic levels
yet you never hear girls compete with men in wrestling at collegiate or olympic levels
She wouldn't be competitive against the top 200 players let alone the best. That was her stated opinion, not mine.
I don't think that high school performance is a good basis for assumptions about adults, though I admit I'm not certain. But there is a clear biological advantage for men in many sports, if you compare world records, it becomes quite obvious
The difference in top men's serve speeds and top women's serve speeds, for example, is fairly significant (155-165 or so for men vs. 125-135 or so for women). That alone would make a pretty significant difference.
Or the athletes in question have a real problem with it, which is exactly what has happened.
If Bolt came back with elevated testosterone levels way beyond a normal range then there would be issues.
While I get the sentiment, the two scenarios aren't really comparable.
The notion that Bolt and Phelps are who they are because of "genetics" is fucking laughable, they're both at the apex of their respective sports because they worked harder than anybody else for it. Genetics might account for 10-15% of their success, the rest all comes down to hard work.
Furthermore, if either came back with heavily elevated testosterone levels there's be issues.
As a scientist I agree. This is such a new field of research that to say with such definitive force that the science has been settled after such limited studies is mind boggling. If I showed up at a conference and made a claim like the moderator has I would be laughed out of the venue. To be handing out bans when people are making well articulated posts debating this contentious subject just acts to stifle any kind of discussion outside of circle jerk posts and lowers the quality of this forum.
Then it accounts for their success. If their times were 10 to 15% slower(which is probably an underestimation), they wouldn't be medalists. That's the point. Virtually all Olympians have strong genetic advantages. This isn't in question. There have been hundreds of studies. Phelps has multiple genetic advantages over some of his opponents. All the hard work in the world does not beat the genetically advantaged who is also working hard.
Phelps' body accounts for a lot of what made him untouchable. His feet and torso size help him out and make him more efficient in the water. You say 10 to 15 percent and that is huge as there is no amount of hard work that can overcome that when we are talking the elite of the elite.
There are always going to be athletes who have a genetic advantage over the average population. Where does one draw the line? I initially was for banning people with elevated hormones, but if you extend that logic then people like Phelps and Bolt also have advantages that are genetic and so should those be policed as well? You can't make Bolt shorter, or Phelps' feet smaller but you can decrease someone's hormone level. That is why this is probably getting done because it is easy to set an arbitrary mark and enforce, not so much for people like Bolt or Phelps.
This is discrimination, plain and simple. Her body naturally produces more testosterone, so she has a natural advantage. Welcome to sports, most dominant athletes have genetic advantages, whether that be height, strength, general bodyweight/size, metabolism, or a combination of those or other factors. If she dominates, so what? How does that make her any different from other dominant athletes in their field?
Yep if you extend this then it would naturally lead to barring certain athletes due to genetic gifts. The hormone thing is relatively easy to suppress so they argue to do that now but I do not think it is fair to do that. The IAAF is pretty much barring Caster Semenya from competing as she will most likely be unable to compete at an elite level without and there is no way she would be able to compete in a male field.
I just don't get why elevated testosterone levels from a naturally occuring source and not, you know, steroids is any different than any other genetic advantage. I'm sure many of the dominate male athletes have slightly higher testosterone levels than many of their competitors as well, in addition to being taller/stronger/having longer arms/whatever. But since she's a woman with a specific genetic advantage suddenly it's a problem? It's inconsistent
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what women's sports is. If there were women who can compete in said sport they would be in the "men's league". Women's sports exist as a space where women can compete among each other on a more level playing field
That said, this ruling does seem pretty bad, sounds like she's a genetic outlier much like any other top athlete would be.
I agree. The only reason why this is happening is because of the ease of suppressing hormones. You can't make an athlete shorter. You can however dictate their hormone level which is why this is being targeted and why the IAAF sees it as a solution. This also leads to the fact that should everyone have the same hormone level so are all female athletes going to be doping in order to get to that level if they are under as you would be at a disadvantage otherwise.
Well we already have ruling where men and women compete in different leagues, because men have so much higher trt levels than women naturally. Her levels are same with men even though she is woman. I know she can't do anything to it and genetics already play a thing in professional sports, but the advantage she has is pretty huge. Didn't some specialists say that her time would drop over 5 seconds with lowered trt levels. That is pretty huge.
I know this sucks for her because it isn't her fault she has those high levels. But the advantage just feels too big. Other womans need doping to get on her level.
Right, but just because you CAN doesn't mean you should. I know you agree with me here, I'm just restating that point.
I am, at least in a broad sense, there are thousands of sporting organizations across the world, I can't say that there are NO exceptions. Any that are not would be rightfully dragged if they did not allow a woman to compete or qualify in it, at least ones of sports where people actually care
See the PGA tour back when Annika Sorenstam (sp?) tried to get in and then Michelle Wie
I guess my view is more US-centric, but it's not like the MLB/NHL/NFL/NBA are barring women from getting in...
golf might be a sport in which women could theoretically compete evenly with men
I mean Shaquile O'Neil was significantly taller than most NBA players during his time. Micheal Phelps has longer arms. Those are big advantages that helped them dominate in their sports. Why is this different?
Does the LPGA/PGA have such events? I'd be interested to see how it shook out.
Ok. This thread is detailing now. No need to bring this up.
They can't. LPGA's top golfers dont hit as far as the PGA's top players. And LPGA courses are on average 1000 yards shorter than the men's.
None of those aren't as big advantages as her TRT levels. Shaq wasn't event best player in NBA during his time, but yeah it did help him. Same with Phelps as his genetics helped him too.
Same with fitness and bodybuilding. Genetics play part in every sport...
ok guys, I concede the reason for women's sports based on the physical differences between male and female
but then why the hell is chess gender segregated then?
but then why the hell is chess gender segregated then?
Because she's competing in a female league which is by nature discriminatory. Men are not allowed to compete because of their physiological advantage. If someone is intersex with male organs that confer that same advantage then I can see why the other competitors would get pissed. Otherwise why not have open sports leagues where anyone can compete like another poster said, then we would never have to worry about any genetic advantages. Well obviously we can't do that because then females would effectively be pushed out of professional sports.
User Banned (1 Week): Misrepresenting staff post with multiple sources, ignoring discussion guidelines surrounding transphobic rhetoric
I agree that if a transgender has the same levels of testosterone as their other female athletes, then there should be no problem in them competing in the same league.
With that said, it is not in accordance with proper academic principles to rely on one study alone, especially when it comes from a journal that may be biased in their approach and mythology. That is like stating, that the Institute for international Finance is a reliable source when discussing the effects of a tightening in capital regulations.
Both sisters lost against a man ranked 203rd in a single set game with 6-1 and 6-2 back in 1998.
I read that it's about encouraging growth of the game among women, a group that historically hasn't seen much encouragement or development in the sport. As it stands, so few women had been playing chess competitively that it behooved them to create a division that would allow for more competitive opportunities.
This might be a stupid and ignorant idea but could we not make it about men and women’s sports and instead define it by testosterone levels. Like each sport where it makes a difference has a type x or a type y (possible poor choice of letters), depending on testosterone levels, and maybe predominantly one will be more females, and one will be more males, but it wouldn’t be exclusive.
I don’t follow sport lol
I don’t follow sport lol
So much transphobic shit has been spewed over this. So many terfs like Paula Radcliffe etc have been spewing hate for ages. Semenya isn't even trans yet has been used to yet again shit on a minority group.
This ruling is disgusting
This ruling is disgusting
If you believe that she would be, you are completely ignorant about the effects of testosterone on human bodies. The US Women's hockey team scrimmages against top level male High School teams to prep for the Olympics because at older ages, the men are too physically strong to go all-out against in a game with heavy physical contact. This is the same reason why girls can beat boys in HS and below in wrestling (as it's weight based and the boys are in the early stages of puberty) but they can't maintain that as the boys mature into adult men.
The fundamental reason we have men's and women's divisions in physical sports is that men produce a gigantic amount of testosterone while women don't, and if you only had a single division, there would be no point in the women competing because they could never win. Testosterone being a hugely effective natural steroid is the reason why every MMA fighter had a Doctor's note for TRT until they banned the exemption and its why it's one of the things they test for w/ doping.
A case like this is complicated because if you are producing an abnormal amount of hormones that would fall into levels of an average male, it's a competitive advantage on an axis where women are explicitly banned from competing if they dope to get that level. It's why Transwomen need to document their HRT regimen dates and testing results in order to compete- someone who has publicly transitioned but hasn't gone through HRT will be getting an advantage that's radically unfair to the other women competing. But in this case, the person in question isn't Trans, but has a medical abnormality causing the boosted testosterone levels. And so the question becomes a question of balancing fairness to her if she doesn't want to go on HRT vs fairness to her other competitors.
It's not. For games like chess, there's an open division and a women's division. It is not a segregated game, the women's division exists to spotlight the game for women, provide role models, and provide a social entry point for new competitors who might be uncomfortable in a male-dominated environment. (most competitive games are heavily male dominated.)
This is effectively what splitting it by gender does because the gap between healthy (cis) men and women is gigantic normally. This case is an extreme outlier.
OK, so her advantage is bigger. So what?
She's a woman, so she competes in the women's league. Just because she's genetically gifted doesn't change that.