# If you have a very high level of testosterone ...



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

... for a woman, should you be allowed to compete in women's events? Would you simply consider it to be a natural advantage like being tall or having big feet, assuming either of those are useful for your chosen sport?

Edited to add: I'm not talking about equestrian events.


----------



## Fiona (22 August 2016)

The 800m runner?  

Must be demoralising being in a race with her. IMO she definitely looks like a man. 

I think commentators said yesterday there is a legal challenge to this particular rule ongoing. .

Fiona


----------



## cold_feet (22 August 2016)

I see it as just another physical attribute you are born with.  You can't change it.  There can't be many positives being like this, why should you be excluded from making use of it?


----------



## HufflyPuffly (22 August 2016)

For me this issue is that for any other female they cannot within the rules increase their testosterone levels to match hers, so for me it's positive discrimination, sad situation all round though...


----------



## cold_feet (22 August 2016)

Fiona said:



			The 800m runner?  

Must be demoralising being in a race with her. IMO she definitely looks like a man. 

I think commentators said yesterday there is a legal challenge to this particular rule ongoing. .

Fiona
		
Click to expand...

It must be demoralising for a swimmer to compete his whole career against Michael Phelps.  Or a tennis player against Roger Federer then Novak Djokavic.   Luck of the draw.


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

I think it is really difficult for all involved really. 
It is my understanding that she has internal testes and no womb/ovaries 
So it depends for the purposes of sport what we are going to define as each sex, and if we are sticking to the binary model where you then put people. Because these people are going to turn up to compete because part of what they are is what is making them good, but I suspect also additionally complicated by knowing exactly how much advantage that is bringing and whether that is 'unfair'.

I guess that is where I see it is maybe not just luck of the draw.. so much as sex designation.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

Yes, because she has, unfortunately for her (and I do feel sorry for her as a person to be undergoing all this public scrutiny at best and abuse at worst), become the focus for intersex athletes even though she's not the only one. However, I also feel sorry for the middle distance runners who are not intersex and who do not have the advantage of extremely high testosterone levels. The whole thing is very complicated if you read about it because some intersex women can have high testosterone levels but their bodies are resistant to it i.e. it gives them no advantage and others still are partially resistant to it. Like you say, it must be demoralising to run against someone who has a huge advantage and one that you cannot replicate without using illegal drugs, no matter how hard you train or how much natural talent you possess.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

I'm not qualified to judge how much of an advantage it gives but this particular athlete did not run well when the rules forced her to take testosterone suppressants. Maybe I am looking at this too simplistically but if a person has external testes they would not be allowed to compete in women's events so should intersex women with internal testes be allowed to compete or is this unfair to those without testes?


----------



## Crackerz (22 August 2016)

Is there a maximum level of testosterone a female athlete can have?


----------



## Fiona (22 August 2016)

I'd love to read an in depth article on the current situation.  

As I understand it, the authorities changed rule to use testosterone with cut off value of 10 as deciding factor but this was legally challenged a couple of years ago and still not resolved  

Most women have testosterone under 3 seemingly

Fiona


----------



## Fiona (22 August 2016)

Snowy Celandine said:



			I'm not qualified to judge how much of an advantage it gives but this particular athlete did not run well when the rules forced her to take testosterone suppressants. Maybe I am looking at this too simplistically but if a person has external testes they would not be allowed to compete in women's events so should intersex women with internal testes be allowed to compete or is this unfair to those without testes?
		
Click to expand...

Thats my view too, but its a v interesting subject. .

Fiona


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

Crackerz said:



			Is there a maximum level of testosterone a female athlete can have?
		
Click to expand...

Fiona's explanation is correct. Intersex women had to have their testosterone levels chemically or surgically altered in order to be able to race under the last but one set of rules but currently there is no upper limit for testosterone levels in place.


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

Actually it is somewhat more complicated than that, this article charts the history of sex definition in sport fairly well. ie it used to be evidence of a Y chromosome at all, even if it didn't make any difference... some athletes will have higher testosterone but not have the appropriate receptors etc. It is mightily complicated 
http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...enya_be_allowed_to_compete_against_women.html


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

I think they tried to have the cut off level at the point at which it would be a normal level expected in a male.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

ester said:



			Actually it is somewhat more complicated than that, this article charts the history of sex definition in sport fairly well. ie it used to be evidence of a Y chromosome at all, even if it didn't make any difference... some athletes will have higher testosterone but not have the appropriate receptors etc. It is mightily complicated 
http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...enya_be_allowed_to_compete_against_women.html

Click to expand...

It is definitely complicated and I do feel sorry for the individuals concerned.


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

As pointed out in the article I linked if you get to the end, it describes 4 potential athletes having their internal testes removed in order to compete and now that ruling has been changed. 

It also makes an intersting point re measuring testosterone got rid of some of the whether they were judging your femaleness issue, changing it to just well you have too much of this in your bloodstream, it doesn't matter why.


----------



## Peregrine Falcon (22 August 2016)

If you have no womb or ovaries but internal testes that surely would lean you towards being a male rather than a woman?  

Difficult subject to treat fairly and without discrimination I think


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

Crackerz said:



			Is there a maximum level of testosterone a female athlete can have?
		
Click to expand...

Paula Radcliffe was saying that is used to be under 3 units of whatever the measurement is I think she said and it's now up to 10, and may have changed again. May have misheard her commentary.



cold_feet said:



			It must be demoralising for a swimmer to compete his whole career against Michael Phelps.  Or a tennis player against Roger Federer then Novak Djokavic.
		
Click to expand...

I disagree with this comparison because you hope both Roger Federer and Novak Djokavic are 'clean' athletes and whilst one may be easier to beat than the other, you're not up against someone who's clearly got a hormonal advantage. 

Raised testosterone levels are a sign of doping in sport and it gets very blurry when someone has a natural advantage. Katie Ledecky's unbeatable in a swimming pool but afaik she doesn't get the 'well must be more of a man than a woman' comments. 

I will say though that the British 800m runner's comments were a bit 'sore loser' like, especially given she came sixth in a final of eight. She didn't lose solely to Caster Semenya, she got beaten by four other athletes too.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

teapot said:



			Paula Radcliffe was saying that is used to be under 3 units of whatever the measurement is I think she said and it's now up to 10, and may have changed again. May have misheard her commentary.



I disagree with this comparison because you hope both Roger Federer and Novak Djokavic are 'clean' athletes and whilst one may be easier to beat than the other, you're not up against someone who's clearly got a hormonal advantage. 

Raised testosterone levels are a sign of doping in sport and it gets very blurry when someone has a natural advantage. Katie Ledecky's unbeatable in a swimming pool but afaik she doesn't get the 'well must be more of a man than a woman' comments. 

I will say though that the British 800m runner's comments were a bit 'sore loser' like, especially given she came sixth in a final of eight. She didn't lose solely to Caster Semenya, she got beaten by four other athletes too.
		
Click to expand...

It's been suggested that all three of the winning athletes in this event are intersex. No idea if that's true but the woman who came sixth was congratulated on getting bronze by another athlete.


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

The level was 10nM/L


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

Snowy Celandine said:



			It's been suggested that all three of the winning athletes in this event are intersex. No idea if that's true but the woman who came sixth was congratulated on getting bronze by another athlete.
		
Click to expand...

If true that's a hell of a comment. 



ester said:



			The level was 10nM/L
		
Click to expand...

That's the one, ta E :smile3:


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

teapot said:



			If true that's a hell of a comment. 



That's the one, ta E :smile3:
		
Click to expand...

It's a heck of a comment if what's true? Do you mean if I just made it up or if another athlete really said it? It's been reported as having been said, that much is true. 

I have no idea how we can treat intersex athletes fairly but if more intersex athletes join the women's teams, and apparently there are places where intersex babies are born more regularly, although still rarely, than the norm then women without testes will struggle to compete at all in my opinion. I can't honestly think of a way to be fair to everyone concerned.

Here's the source material and the quote

"In a reference to questions surrounding the sex of other competitors, British 400m runner Nigel Levine tweeted afterwards: "Happy for @LynseySharp for coming 3rd in the women 800m.""

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ses-obvious-hypoadrogenous-women-having-bein/


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

Snowy Celandine said:



			It's a heck of a comment if what's true? Do you mean if I just made it up or if another athlete really said it? It's been reported as having been said, that much is true. 

I have no idea how we can treat intersex athletes fairly but if more intersex athletes join the women's teams, and apparently there are places where intersex babies are born more regularly, although still rarely, than the norm then women without testes will struggle to compete at all in my opinion. I can't honestly think of a way to be fair to everyone concerned.

Here's the source material and the quote

"In a reference to questions surrounding the sex of other competitors, British 400m runner Nigel Levine tweeted afterwards: "Happy for @LynseySharp for coming 3rd in the women 800m.""

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ses-obvious-hypoadrogenous-women-having-bein/

Click to expand...

If another athlete actually said it - athletics is bitchy at the best of times but having comments like that thrown about isn't good for the sport. If they're that concerned about never winning/fair competition, why not vote with their feet and not run? That's a genuine question btw. 

It's a very tricky area as was the running on blades versus two legs debate.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

teapot said:



			If another athlete actually said it - athletics is bitchy at the best of times but having comments like that thrown about isn't good for the sport. If they're that concerned about never winning/fair competition, why not vote with their feet and not run? That's a genuine question btw. 

It's a very tricky area as was the running on blades versus two legs debate.
		
Click to expand...

I agree that it's like the blades v two legs debate and also the length of the blades if two athletes with blades are running. Another problem with no real solution or at least not one that will please everyone.


----------



## TheOldTrout (22 August 2016)

teapot said:



			If another athlete actually said it - athletics is bitchy at the best of times but having comments like that thrown about isn't good for the sport. If they're that concerned about never winning/fair competition, why not vote with their feet and not run? That's a genuine question btw. 

It's a very tricky area as was the running on blades versus two legs debate.
		
Click to expand...

I found a lot of the comments about Caster Semanya incredibly nasty. I really admired Jenny Meadows for refusing to join in with it. (I think this was at the London Olympics - if not, it would have been at a world championships.)

On a related topic, there was a petition going round on facebook before the Olympics about 2 British athletes in the womens' team who were male to female transitioning but hadn't had the surgery - the petition was saying that they shouldn't be in the team as they shouldn't be eligible. (Similar argument I suppose, about the high levels of testosterone.) I couldn't understand how they could be considered trans women when they hadn't had surgery - but then I just don't understand the whole concept of transitioning. I've no idea, to be honest, whether it was even a genuine petition or a hoax one, given what social media can be like...


----------



## cold_feet (22 August 2016)

"I disagree with this comparison because you hope both Roger Federer and Novak Djokavic are 'clean' athletes and whilst one may be easier to beat than the other, you're not up against someone who's clearly got a hormonal advantage. "

This thread is about natural high levels of testosterone. Therefore also 'clean' athletes.  

But my comment was referring to the other athletes being demoralised.  This surely can't be a good enough reason to exclude anyone.


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

cold_feet said:



			This thread is about natural high levels of testosterone. Therefore also 'clean' athletes.
		
Click to expand...

Devil's advocate moment - if natural high levels of testosterone are allowed, why arn't unnatural levels? How can one athlete have a natural advantage but not fail a dope test but someone with an unnatural level of the same value fail a dope test? 

Tricky tricky area imho. 

Completely agree that you can't exclude people on the basis of their feelings.


----------



## YorksG (22 August 2016)

Perhaps the simplest, if still not the fairest, method would be to go by the gender on the birth certificate of the athlete. This can still leave problems for intersex people, although the athlete who prompted the OP would still be classed as female.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

I don't see it a question of hurt feelings. I am imagining someone being the fastest non intersex female elite athlete in the world but still having no chance of winning because she's not allowed to boost her testosterone levels to match that of the intersex women against whom she's racing.


----------



## stencilface (22 August 2016)

There should surely be an upper limit that's different for box sexes as far as testosterone is concerned?

I do think it's unfair that people with a natural but not necessarily 'normal' hormone levels are allowed to compete against people who fall into the traditional  zones of hormone levels (sorry that's written really badly!). It's a bit like a runner with a third leg isn't it? 

There didn't used to be enough Paralympic athletes for a games did there, maybe there needs to be a separate competition for those that fall in terms twilight zone between male and female.


----------



## Rapidash (22 August 2016)

I think I'm going to wait for the results of the research currently being carried out as to whether raised testosterone really does give much of an advantage before I rush to judge. 

However it seems a bit odd for an athlete genetically better suited to 800m than me to complain about someone even better suited. Particularly when that athlete has had access to training facilities far above anything a lot of other athletes get. Raised levels of testosterone is surely nothing compared to the differences in training provision between say Ukraine and the USA. 

Also if Semenya was significantly better I think the other athletes would have a stronger point. As it was she didn't win by much and was nowhere near the world record. Eminently beatable as far as I can see.


----------



## ycbm (22 August 2016)

stencilface said:



			There should surely be an upper limit that's different for box sexes as far as testosterone is concerned?

I do think it's unfair that people with a natural but not necessarily 'normal' hormone levels are allowed to compete against people who fall into the traditional  zones of hormone levels (sorry that's written really badly!). It's a bit like a runner with a third leg isn't it? 

There didn't used to be enough Paralympic athletes for a games did there, maybe there needs to be a separate competition for those that fall in terms twilight zone between male and female.
		
Click to expand...

It's very like a swimmer with size 14 feet and partly webbed toes ....  oh, hold on .....


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

I agree, Essentially the ruling said that athletics has 2 years to prove it is conferring the advantage they say it does - as opposed to other possible advantages of being intersex. 
Yes she might be running better than when she was being testosterone suppressed but that might be for different reasons/am not sure how they do the suppression so it might be a factor of that if that makes sense, rather than the reduced amount itself.


----------



## ycbm (22 August 2016)

I have just looked up her condition. She has a Y chromosome, testes, no uterus and no ovaries. That makes her a man. She is only really a female because she was brought up as a female. Now I know that, I agree with the athletes who say it is unfair to compete against her.

I think the definition should be what your DNA says you were born as. I am sorry for trans gender people and people with confused DNA and mixed body parts, but only as sorry as I am for a deaf person who wants to sing in a choir, for example.


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

Where did you find she had a Y, I thought she was XX?


----------



## ycbm (22 August 2016)

http://sportsscientists.com/2016/07/caster-semenya-debate/

I can't find any official statement, but I'd go so far as to say it's being suppressed because there isn't a single statement that I can find that says she doesn't have a y chromosome.


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

Rapidash said:



			I think I'm going to wait for the results of the research currently being carried out as to whether raised testosterone really does give much of an advantage before I rush to judge.
		
Click to expand...

The fact that testosterone is banned worldwide as a doping agent suggests it might well impact on performance. 

I do wonder whether this would be a topic of conversation if we were talking about naturally elevated levels of oestrogen instead.


----------



## alainax (22 August 2016)

It gets so difficult as no one wishes to hurt anyone's feelings or discriminate especially now a days. They are going to have to come up with some restrictions with who can and cannot compete in certain classes. 

Maybe the whole men and women thing has to change. More toward restricted and unrestricted. Those who measure x amount on the scale are eligible to compete in restricted sections ( which would be 99% female). But means those who either do not identify with a gender or score more toward being a male still can compete in the open class (mainly male). Daft idea I know... But can't really think of a better solution. I too thought she looked very physically different from her piers.


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

It's banned because it is a steroid, other than that the science really doesn't seem to be there at the moment to define the advantage. Lets face it all the elite women run faster than most men .


----------



## ycbm (22 August 2016)

ester said:



			It's banned because it is a steroid, other than that the science really doesn't seem to be there at the moment to define the advantage. Lets face it all the elite women run faster than most men .
		
Click to expand...

Yes, but she's 6 seconds faster than herself over 800 metres when she doesn't have testosterone levels massively higher than a woman without testicles. If she didn't have a Y chromosome I'd say this was a 'swimmer with big feet' issue, but if she does it isn't fair to other female athletes. We separate men from women in almost all competition for a reason.


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

ester said:



			It's banned because it is a steroid, other than that the science really doesn't seem to be there at the moment to define the advantage. Lets face it all the elite women run faster than most men .
		
Click to expand...

Oh I get that, but it's not the only steroid that's based on a natural hormone, EPO's another one. 

Replace 'runner with naturally high levels of testosterone' with 'naturally high levels of EPO' - is that tested at the same time?


----------



## ester (22 August 2016)

All which is based on genes, and there are a couple hundred they have identified with links to performance, there will be more. https://www.newscientist.com/articl...mpid=ILC%7CNSNS%7C2016-GLOBAL-webpush-Semenya
Maybe we should just scrap the women and just say fastest person  (very very tongue in cheek)

I think the athletics federation lot thought they had found a nice neat solution to the problem, I'm not sure they have.


----------



## stencilface (22 August 2016)

Maybe to even things up we should make everyone compete on horseback, that is after all the only Olympic sport not split by gender


----------



## Snowy Celandine (22 August 2016)

"Maybe we should just scrap the women and just say fastest person (very very tongue in cheek)"

I know you aren't being serious ester but if we do get to the stage where we allow intersex women with naturally high testosterone levels and also trans women to compete in women's events for fear of offending anyone then there won't be many events for which it is worth even the most supremely talented woman athlete training for. Equestrian events and motorsports would still be "do-able" but anything relying on muscular strength and so on would be a lost cause in my opinion.


----------



## stencilface (22 August 2016)

I think unless you have categories for everything  (native Americans used to recognise 5 genders for eg) you really need to be strict on the male female classification otherwise there's no point really. Un PC as it is, and however gender fluid modern life may become, I just can't see mainstream sport adapting to accept anything but male and female.


----------



## Fiona (22 August 2016)

stencilface said:



			I think unless you have categories for everything  (native Americans used to recognise 5 genders for eg) you really need to be strict on the male female classification otherwise there's no point really. Un PC as it is, and however gender fluid modern life may become, I just can't see mainstream sport adapting to accept anything but male and female.
		
Click to expand...


I agree. .

Fiona


----------



## teapot (22 August 2016)

ester said:



			All which is based on genes, and there are a couple hundred they have identified with links to performance, there will be more. https://www.newscientist.com/articl...mpid=ILC%7CNSNS%7C2016-GLOBAL-webpush-Semenya
Maybe we should just scrap the women and just say fastest person  (very very tongue in cheek)

I think the athletics federation lot thought they had found a nice neat solution to the problem, I'm not sure they have.
		
Click to expand...

I get that article's reasoning, but muscle mass, blood type, power, speed etc are things that are fairly individual. Some are suited for sprint running, others for distance etc, but your sport isn't defined by that, not in those categories anyway. Sport is defined by whether you're a man or woman, nothing less, nothing more. 

So I'm not sure gender, inter-sex etc can be put in the same big box as muscle type or make up of blood. I've studied a lot on sex and gender (albeit from a social construct point of view) and I guess it depends on how you want to define what is a man and what is a woman. Some would argue that a human being that has testes, not ovaries, is a man. Others would say 'well do you need to have ovaries to fit the social construct of what is being female/a woman?'


----------



## zaminda (22 August 2016)

I know a few people who are trans. One is currently transitioning, and is every bit as strong as they always were. Another who is several years post surgery is possibly slightly less strong, but this is due to the fact they no longer train and compete in the sports they did before. 
Based on my experience, I would say those who are trans should not be allowed to compete as women.


----------



## YorksG (22 August 2016)

One of the difficulties regarding the changing of body shape etc of trans people, is that unless it happens pre-puberty, then the muscle/bone/fat ratio is likely to be that of the original biological sex of the person. So female to male trans are unlikely to have the same bone/muscle density as some one who was born male and vice versa, which would have implications for athletic performance.


----------



## GirlFriday (23 August 2016)

cold_feet said:



			I see it as just another physical attribute you are born with.  You can't change it.  There can't be many positives being like this, why should you be excluded from making use of it?
		
Click to expand...

Being a man is just something you are born with. And men are excluded from the women's events.

If we have women's competition then we need to define what being a woman means for purposes of qualification 

A lot people without clearly defined external sex organs have traditionally been brought up as female as that was the best guess available at the time/considered easier for them. It may be what is on their birth certificates too. That doesn't mean it is necessarily the gender they resemble most closely in many ways.

We don't treat rigs as mares.

I'd tend to think a  chromosomal classification (this competition is for XX athletes, not 'women' per se) might be a better arbitrary line to draw than a hormonal level one as it is currently more fixed (surely any male athlete could take testosterone suppressants to meet at arbitrary level for that in theory?) which goes to YorksG's point too. But if we have segregated competition we need to segregate. And that will inevitably be hard for some individuals with unusual circumstances.

Edited to add: not against people taking hormone suppressants for medical (including potentially mental health related) reasons, just think it is a potentially harmful thing to encourage purely for sport.


----------



## ester (23 August 2016)

They started off with the chromosome designation, but it was causing issues. 

I am going to post this article again because I do think it is worth a read with regards to the history of this issue. In the 60s all female athletes were tested and if they had Y markers were not allowed to compete. 




			A woman with an XX pair of chromosomes might pass and be granted her &#8220;certificate of femininity,&#8221; even if she had a masculine physique, ambiguous genitalia, and high levels of testosterone&#8212;all perhaps resulting from a sex-hormone-producing adrenal tumor or a genetic condition such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia.
		
Click to expand...

 - OR the opposite, they tested XY with no evidence of any male characterstics or athletic advantages.
http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...enya_be_allowed_to_compete_against_women.html


----------



## HashRouge (23 August 2016)

I don't really know what I think about this. It is extraordinarily complicated, that's for sure. On the one hand, it does seem incredibly unfair on non-hyperandrogenic athletes if raised testosterone levels truly do give a significant advantage. I think they do, based on the fact that testosterone is a banned substance, but I'm interested in the scientific arguments behind it. At the same time, I feel incredibly uncomfortable with the idea of persecuting someone because of the way they were born. Should Semenya and athletes like her be banned from competing or forced to take hormone suppressants because of a condition they were born with? But does it undermine fair play to let her compete? Is fair play more important than human rights? I just don't think there is any easy answer here and I'm very glad that I'm not one of the people who will have to make a decision!

I do think this is an issue that is going to run and run - the 800m final has put it firmly in the spotlight and there is no denying the fact that if you didn't know better you might be forgiven for thinking that the photos from the medal ceremony showed a men's medal ceremony. It is a shame that we can't simply celebrate these women as the extraordinary athletes they undoubtedly are, but at the same time I do understand the controversy. I don't really know what I think, which isn't very useful I know!


----------



## GirlFriday (23 August 2016)

Interesting article.

Now I've realised how much subjectivity (and frankly invasivness) there is in other tests I'm now even more in favour of the old Y test.

No advantage to be gained by undergoing potentially damaging hormonal or surgical treatments and a clear outcome. In the occasional cases of false positives there would be unfairness but as far as I could tell there was only one documented case of that.

Probably calling something a "certificate of femininity" is actually an issue now. Would be more accurate to call it a certificate of Y chromosome absence or something because obviously feminity is a different thing.

Interestingly (for me) I also work in a field where women with high testosterone levels are over represented. We are still at a disadvantage to the men though. But we don't have positive discrimination...

Edited to add: asking people who identify as women but have a Y chromosome (or other, better objective criteria if one/a set of them can be found) to compete in an open competition doesn't mean they can't compete, at whatever level, it just means they can't compete in the special competition for Xx (or whatever) athletes. Same as having a veteran's class doesn't mean younger people/horses can't compete (at whatever level they are able) elsewhere


----------



## Templebar (23 August 2016)

I think surely the easiest way is xx female xy male you compete as that. Im sure if a woman has naturally high testosterone or what ever it is that gains her a benefit in that sport that's great at least there is something they can do, because im sure everything else in life is probably not quite so easy and if that means the other women not being able to win at that time then sorry its bad luck, bad timing but at least they are all round normal so can probably have a normal life and ok they haven't won the gold but at the end of the day, life goes on.


----------



## ester (23 August 2016)

And if you are XXY or XYY, that's why it starts to get complicated  and I do think for most hormones/the body's ability to dictate more about sex than XY genetics so I am not sure if a straight XY test is going to keep everyone happy


----------



## TheOldTrout (24 August 2016)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/24/caster-semenya-is-the-one-at-a-disadvantage
I found this quite interesting.


----------



## Snowy Celandine (24 August 2016)

TheOldTrout said:



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/24/caster-semenya-is-the-one-at-a-disadvantage
I found this quite interesting.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't.


----------



## ycbm (24 August 2016)

TheOldTrout said:



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/24/caster-semenya-is-the-one-at-a-disadvantage
I found this quite interesting.
		
Click to expand...

Essentially this article says 'people should stop complaining about Caster Semenya being male and competing in a race for females because she was born poor and that was a bigger disadvantage than female athletes running aginst her had.' 

Sorry, I do not accept that argument.


----------



## TheOldTrout (24 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			Essentially this article says 'people should stop complaining about Caster Semenya being male and competing in a race for females because she was born poor and that was a bigger disadvantage than female athletes running aginst her had.' 

Sorry, I do not accept that argument.
		
Click to expand...

I think it was more that having a high level of testosterone is not the only advantage an athlete can have over others. (And Caster Semenya isn't actually male - she's hyperandrogenic.)


----------



## Snowy Celandine (24 August 2016)

The article was heavy on opinion and light on fact. I placed no reliance on it. I think that women's sport will be all but eradicated if women with testes and/or trans women are allowed to race against women without testes.


----------



## ycbm (24 August 2016)

Duplicate


----------



## ycbm (24 August 2016)

TheOldTrout said:



			I think it was more that having a high level of testosterone is not the only advantage an athlete can have over others. (And Caster Semenya isn't actually male - she's hyperandrogenic.)
		
Click to expand...

Her DNA is male. She has testicles and she has no uterus or ovaries. In my view, that makes her a male. The only thing making her a female is her own self identification as female because of how her mother brought her up because she had no penis when she was born.

And your synopsis is the same as mine, said the other way round!  Richer athletes have an advantage over poor ones so they shouldn't complain about a poor male running in a race for females.

I don't agree, whichever way around it is written!


----------



## ester (24 August 2016)

Did you find the link that she is XY?


----------



## HashRouge (24 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			Her DNA is male. She has testicles and she has no uterus or ovaries. In my view, that makes her a male. The only thing making her a female is her own self identification as female because of how her mother brought her up because she had no penis when she was born.

And your synopsis is the same as mine, said the other way round!  Richer athletes have an advantage over poor ones so they shouldn't complain about a poor male running in a race for females.

I don't agree, whichever way around it is written!
		
Click to expand...




ester said:



			Did you find the link that she is XY?
		
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, everything that ycbm has said is supposition because the exact results of Semenya's gender testing were never released because of privacy laws.


----------



## ycbm (24 August 2016)

I posted it ester, check back.

Yes it's hearsay.

I find the strongest argument that she has a Y chromosome is that unless my research skills are failing me there is no statement anywhere on the net that she does not.

I cannot believe, if she does not have Y chromosome, that this would not simply have been stated to shut the whole argument down.


----------



## ester (24 August 2016)

Ah yes I see what you mean, I guess I was looking at it the other way, in that if she were XY there would have been no way she could compete as a woman.


----------



## ycbm (24 August 2016)

The xy test got dropped after being challenged. This seems to be a fair report on the whole issue.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/29446276

I believe what they have to pass at the moment is a 'does she outwardly physically resemble a woman' test, which would pretty much allow anyone without external testes and penis to run as a woman. Including males who have had surgery and then self define as female.  It's political correctness gone mad.


----------



## ester (25 August 2016)

I know the test got dropped but I assume it is still done when there is a questionable athlete to try and generate a whole picture to draw a conclusion from, it would seem ridiculous not to but then . they report back July 2017 as this issue was raised last summer so it will be interesting to see what the athletics people come back with.


----------



## ycbm (25 August 2016)

I did a bit more exploration. Caster Semenya is married to a woman..

Caster may, of course, be a gay woman. But as a person with no uterus, no ovaries,  and  testicles that produce testosterone, isn't it just more likely she's a man and shouldn't have been allowed to run in a women only race?

The politically correct  Emperor really, really is stark naked


----------



## firm (25 August 2016)

I read an article a while back about intersex athletes and some stories were very sad. One of the points it made  was intersex is a relatively rare condition and that a disproportionately high number of intersex athletes have won medals.


----------



## claracanter (25 August 2016)

This thread is really interesting OP. I began reading it as it is such a complex situation I wanted to see what other people felt about it and after reading all the links posted on here, I think on balance she should not be allowed to compete. Before I read this thread I wasn't sure what I felt.

ycbm, I got to the same point as you when I too heard she was married to a woman. But I'm not sure if thats us just jumping to conclusions and if it is any of our business. The whole situation is ghastly for her but something has to be done. As someone else said, I'm glad I'm not the one who has to make the decisions but somebody has to draw a line somewhere and I think the chromosome classification might be more workable than the testosterone levels.

For the people saying she didn't break the world record in the Olympics or win by a huge margin, I'm afraid I rather think that is deliberate on her part as she didn't want to create more controversy.


----------



## HashRouge (25 August 2016)

ycbm said:



			I did a bit more exploration. Caster Semenya is married to a woman..

Caster may, of course, be a gay woman. But as a person with no uterus, no ovaries,  and  testicles that produce testosterone, isn't it just more likely she's a man and shouldn't have been allowed to run in a women only race?

The politically correct  Emperor really, really is stark naked 

Click to expand...

But again, everything you've posted regarding her biological makeup is hearsay and I do think it's important to remember that. As far as I understand it, Semenya underwent extensive gender testing in 2009 following her victory at the world championships. If the results were as straightforward as you say, she would not be able to compete as a woman, end off. Don't forget the IAAF doesn't want her to compete as a woman, so if they had definitive proof that she was ineligible then presumably they would have used it. It's not like she's just pulled the wool over everyone's eyes by passing herself off as a woman because she wants to.


----------



## ester (25 August 2016)

firm said:



			I read an article a while back about intersex athletes and some stories were very sad. One of the points it made  was intersex is a relatively rare condition and that a disproportionately high number of intersex athletes have won medals.
		
Click to expand...

A disproportionately high number of athletes are intersex too, which is why it isn't a problem that will go away. 

I'd agree re. I don't think she was going for the world record she raced pretty easy as far as can be told over a tv screen.


----------



## ycbm (26 August 2016)

HashRouge said:



			But again, everything you've posted regarding her biological makeup is hearsay and I do think it's important to remember that. As far as I understand it, Semenya underwent extensive gender testing in 2009 following her victory at the world championships. If the results were as straightforward as you say, she would not be able to compete as a woman, end off. Don't forget the IAAF doesn't want her to compete as a woman, so if they had definitive proof that she was ineligible then presumably they would have used it. It's not like she's just pulled the wool over everyone's eyes by passing herself off as a woman because she wants to.
		
Click to expand...


No, only the y chromosome is hearsay the rest is recorded all over the place. She has testes, she has no uterus and no ovaries.  She's married to a woman. I'm not saying the results are straightforward but I am saying that being intersex does not make her a woman and she's running in women only events.

After testing, she was required to lower her testosterone levels to those produced by women athletes. And started losing. They've been forced by political correctness to drop that rule, as they were forced to drop the y chromosome rule. 

I feel very sorry for her. The same way I feel sorry for blind people not being able to win an 800m gold medal. Life does not deal people a fair hand, but that doesn't mean women should be denied a level playing field to allow her to run.

Do you personally think she should be allowed to run in a women only race?


----------



## ycbm (26 August 2016)

In the interests of fairness I must add that the 2009 year report that she has internal testes and no ovaries or uterus was leaked and has not been made officially public.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (26 August 2016)

This is such a gnarly subject and one I am glad I don't have to make decisions on. 

My gut feeling is that they should not be able to run in a female only race. But, having discussed this with colleagues at work, there is a definite split between younger people thinking its acceptable (the argument being that there are always athletes with biological advantages-big feet, abnormally large hearts for example) and older ones thinking it isn't. I am not suggesting that is the case for posters on here but for me personally, I think I have to educate myself a bit more in gender issues I think.


----------



## Meowy Catkin (26 August 2016)

So do we need three races per event? One for women, one for men and one for intersex people?


----------



## Clodagh (26 August 2016)

I think she should not be able to run in a women only race. She is not a woman by any definition, as ycbm says there are things that do prevent you being able to do things that you may aspire to.
She could run in the mens race, not a problem.


----------

