I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
Not sure I'd be happy with seeing the end to women's athletics. How would you feel about disbanding the Charlton ladies team and them being told that there's one team now and that they have to compete with and against men?
The simplest solution is to allow a woman who's lived her whole life as a woman, who has female chromosomes and female genitalia, to compete in women's athletics
This is dreadful of course and hardly even to do with sport. This is, as usual, about the policing of women's bodies, with a side-order of racial discrimination
You know me man, I'm pretty damn liberal, but I'm struggling to see your thought processes that have led to this conclusion.
I sort of get the policing bodies thing, but when we're talking about something in the context of an all-women arena, I don't think it's quite the right angle.
As for racial discrimination - black athletes tend to dominate track and field anyway. I don't think Semenya's "blackness" is (consciously) affecting the decision making here.
I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
Not sure I'd be happy with seeing the end to women's athletics. How would you feel about disbanding the Charlton ladies team and them being told that there's one team now and that they have to compete with and against men?
We seem to be reaching a point where we are unable to clearly define genders - from a legal perspective this will be a minefield.
Where do intersex, transgender etc competitors compete and should they have separate categories?
I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
Not sure I'd be happy with seeing the end to women's athletics. How would you feel about disbanding the Charlton ladies team and them being told that there's one team now and that they have to compete with and against men?
We seem to be reaching a point where we are unable to clearly define genders - from a legal perspective this will be a minefield.
Where do intersex, transgender etc competitors compete and should they have separate categories?
There is no simple answer.
Biological sex and today's definition of gender are two separate things. Competition should be based on biological sex, not gender.
That's about the long and short of it, which is what makes Semenya and Chand's cases so controversial. I'm actually on their side in this instance as they're biological females that just happen to have a rare form of increased testosterone that gives them somewhat of a competitive edge.
I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
Not sure I'd be happy with seeing the end to women's athletics. How would you feel about disbanding the Charlton ladies team and them being told that there's one team now and that they have to compete with and against men?
We seem to be reaching a point where we are unable to clearly define genders - from a legal perspective this will be a minefield.
Where do intersex, transgender etc competitors compete and should they have separate categories?
There is no simple answer.
Seems to me like there will be new categories of athletes created that are specific to their “type” - similar to what currently happens in Paralympics.
I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
Not sure I'd be happy with seeing the end to women's athletics. How would you feel about disbanding the Charlton ladies team and them being told that there's one team now and that they have to compete with and against men?
We seem to be reaching a point where we are unable to clearly define genders - from a legal perspective this will be a minefield.
Where do intersex, transgender etc competitors compete and should they have separate categories?
There is no simple answer.
Biological sex and today's definition of gender are two separate things. Competition should be based on biological sex, not gender.
That's about the long and short of it, which is what makes Semenya and Chand's cases so controversial. I'm actually on their side in this instance as they're biological females that just happen to have a rare form of increased testosterone that gives them somewhat of a competitive edge.
I don't think the biological sex definition is as clear cut as you're saying. The athletics authorities have struggled with it for a long time and the focus on testosterone seems a bit arbitary.
I actually think that the decision is the correct decision. As she has unusually high T levels the playing field is not level unless they manage her levels.
Why just pick on testosterone? There are a number of factors that don't make for a level playing field.
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
Not sure I'd be happy with seeing the end to women's athletics. How would you feel about disbanding the Charlton ladies team and them being told that there's one team now and that they have to compete with and against men?
We seem to be reaching a point where we are unable to clearly define genders - from a legal perspective this will be a minefield.
Where do intersex, transgender etc competitors compete and should they have separate categories?
There is no simple answer.
Biological sex and today's definition of gender are two separate things. Competition should be based on biological sex, not gender.
That's about the long and short of it, which is what makes Semenya and Chand's cases so controversial. I'm actually on their side in this instance as they're biological females that just happen to have a rare form of increased testosterone that gives them somewhat of a competitive edge.
I don't think the biological sex definition is as clear cut as you're saying. The athletics authorities have struggled with it for a long time and the focus on testosterone seems a bit arbitary.
Maybe their regulations need to be changed to include other hormonal and genetic targets. The risk then is making the entry harder for those we seek to help. It's easier to make something worse, by changing the rules, than it is to make something better. Especially if what you're looking to change is already running at a pretty optimal level and in a largely fair way.
I admire the strength of character Semenya has shown to keep going given the massive anount of abuse levelled at her. It must be a very difficult life to be villified in such a public manner.
This is dreadful of course and hardly even to do with sport. This is, as usual, about the policing of women's bodies, with a side-order of racial discrimination
I think the whole thing is a shame ..if she is biologically a female and doesn't enhance her metabolism illegally she should be left alone ...I think they created a very dangerous and unsafe precedent ...
It is an issue for women's sport though. On one side, you could argue that you can't penalise a basketball player for being 7ft, even though he/she has an advantage over a 5ft player. But in Semenya's case, you are saying to women with normal testosterone levels that they might as well not bother competing as they won't beat her. But her argument is like the basketball player, it is a natural advantage.
The logical solution is for women to compete with men, then it won't matter. But we know that is certain aspects they can't. The whole notion of women's sport accepts its participants are not the strongest or fastest. Because there is women's sport (as there should be) I don't think it is possible to find a fair solution.
It is an issue for women's sport though. On one side, you could argue that you can't penalise a basketball player for being 7ft, even though he/she has an advantage over a 5ft player. But in Semenya's case, you are saying to women with normal testosterone levels that they might as well not bother competing as they won't beat her. But her argument is like the basketball player, it is a natural advantage.
The logical solution is for women to compete with men, then it won't matter. But we know that is certain aspects they can't. The whole notion of women's sport accepts its participants are not the strongest or fastest. Because there is women's sport (as there should be) I don't think it is possible to find a fair solution.
What exactly is 'normal' though? She's a natural human being living a healthy life and isn't trying to enhance her body through use of artificial drugs or stimulants. What could be more normal? It's only societal pressures that decide what normal is, there's nothing intrinsic about 'normal'.
Caster Semenya has lost a landmark case against athletics' governing body meaning it will be allowed to restrict testosterone levels in female runners.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) rejected the South African's challenge against the IAAF's new rules.
Comments
Simolest solution is to remove gender categories.
She has the physique of a man, when you view photographs.
It's a shame for her, but it's certainly not fair for Semenya to compete with women.
Let the U8's play the U23's in future.
I sort of get the policing bodies thing, but when we're talking about something in the context of an all-women arena, I don't think it's quite the right angle.
As for racial discrimination - black athletes tend to dominate track and field anyway. I don't think Semenya's "blackness" is (consciously) affecting the decision making here.
She looks like a much more rugged man than I do.
Where do intersex, transgender etc competitors compete and should they have separate categories?
There is no simple answer.
That's about the long and short of it, which is what makes Semenya and Chand's cases so controversial. I'm actually on their side in this instance as they're biological females that just happen to have a rare form of increased testosterone that gives them somewhat of a competitive edge.
That's reductive, simplistic, and redundant in myriad ways, doing nothing to advance the conversation.
It's the high testosterone levels, which enable her to have a man's physique, which gives her an unfair advantage over the other competitors.
I believe in being fair, but fair to everyone. I don't think one person's rights has priority over let's say 1,000 women's rights.
I think the answer has to be separate categories, with like being able to compete with like.
What?
She isn't a cheat
The logical solution is for women to compete with men, then it won't matter. But we know that is certain aspects they can't. The whole notion of women's sport accepts its participants are not the strongest or fastest. Because there is women's sport (as there should be) I don't think it is possible to find a fair solution.
what’s she scared of healthy competition for once