Caster Semenya could be forced to undertake hormone therapy for future Olympics

[dowie]

when all I've done is state what the regulators have already decided

No, you haven't, when did "the regulators" decide that intersex males such as Semenya have no advantage here?

You've drawn a flawed conclusion yourself by citing that 10% figure and then combining that with your observation re: Semenya... the very thing I've literally addressed above and you're still in denial of.

 

[ttaskmaster]

No, you haven't, when did "the regulators" decide that intersex males such as Semenya have no advantage here?

See previous remarks about the CAS - 10% is the advantage elite male athletes have over female ones. 2% is not enough to qualify.

That's all there is to it.
Some witter about the statistics of non-elite amateur athletes and when they do or don't beat professional elite athletes (which even I have done on occasion) has no bearing on the regulations as already decided and arbitrated.

 

[dowie]

See previous remarks about the CAS - 10% is the advantage elite male athletes have over female ones. 2% is not enough to qualify.

That doesn't answer my question, I did see your previous remarks where you made that argument and I've highlighted the flaw in it. You've not backed up your claim that "the regulators" decided that intersex males such as Semenya have no advantage here?

Some witter about the statistics of non-elite amateur athletes and when they do or don't beat professional elite athletes (which even I have done on occasion) has no bearing on the regulations as already decided and arbitrated.

That was simply illustrating the flaw in your argument. What makes Caster "elite" here anyway vs say a fast county-level runner? If Caster weren't classified as female then she would simply be a fast county-level runner too.

You have seen why your argument is flawed now surely? That's why you're now deflecting to some vague claims about "the regulators" that you can't back up. Currently, the regulations require her to suppress her testosterone levels which isn't really in line with what you're claiming.

 

[C Kent]

That was simply illustrating the flaw in your argument. What makes Caster "elite" here anyway vs say a fast county-level runner? If Caster weren't classified as female then she would simply be a fast county-level runner too.

Keep banging your head against a brick wall there Dowie, ttaskmaster seems to be under the impression that all male 'elite' athletes should be 10-12% better than all female elite athletes regardless. If anything Caster perfectly illustrates that an 'average' élite male athlete is able to complete with and regularly beat the very best females in the world (we'll ignore the results of the 2016 Olympics as the 3 medal positions were all won by athletes with DSD tho ). Its the same as the university swimmer that competed as a man then transited, ranked around 500 as a man, said i'm a woman and boom, became the no 1 ranked female swimmer.

 

[ttaskmaster]

You've not backed up your claim that "the regulators" decided that intersex males such as Semenya have no advantage here?

I never claimed "no advantage".
That's on you..... again.

That was simply illustrating the flaw in your argument. What makes Caster "elite" here anyway vs say a fast county-level runner? If Caster weren't classified as female then she would simply be a fast county-level runner too.

A flaw in an argument that wasn't mine.

As for your own 'deflection' into whataboutery and whatiffery - Doesn't matter. She *is* classified as female, as are several other intersex athletes, whether anyone likes it or not.
The regulations that presume to take the effects of testosterone on performance as a given similarly presume to take her female classification as a given.... whether anyone likes it or not.

You have seen why your argument is flawed now surely? That's why you're now deflecting to some vague claims about "the regulators" that you can't back up. Currently, the regulations require her to suppress her testosterone levels which isn't really in line with what you're claiming.

No.
I see why the argument you have constructed is flawed.

Also - Testosterone levels on the presumption that a high one confers a male advantage of 10-12% on average, by which the separation of male and female categories is justified, and where (according to CAS) a mere 2% (or 1.6%, depending on source) may not be so justified.

Keep banging your head against a brick wall there Dowie

Yes, please do... literally.

ttaskmaster seems to be under the impression that all male 'elite' athletes should be 10-12% better than all female elite athletes regardless.

I'm just going by what the regulator (and subsequently everyone else) states is the "male advantage" and comparing it to the results. It's what their regulations hinge upon, after all... and by their own standards, intersex athletes do not exhibit even half such an advantage.

One might argue that the nature of their intersex conditions mean their bodies are undervirilized and similarly may not get the full advantage that 'normal' genetically-male athletes do.
Conversely, if amateur males are not likely to win against professional female Olympians, then simply being male is not necessarily an advantage there, either.

To again quote the CAS in their arbitration:
"While a 10% difference in athletic performance certainly justifies having separate male and female categories, a 1% difference may not justify a separation".
"The degree or magnitude of the advantage is therefore critical".

 

[Diddums]

So has this bloke had his frank & beans discovered yet or what?

 

[C Kent]

One might argue that the nature of their intersex conditions mean their bodies are undervirilized and similarly may not get the full advantage that 'normal' genetically-male athletes do.
Conversely, if amateur males are not likely to win against professional female Olympians, then simply being male is not necessarily an advantage there, either.

To again quote the CAS in their arbitration:
"While a 10% difference in athletic performance certainly justifies having separate male and female categories, a 1% difference may not justify a separation".
"The degree or magnitude of the advantage is therefore critical".

So basically you agree that an athlete that has benefited from being biologically male their entire life is perfectly fine to participate in women's athletics just as long as said advantage isn't by a huge margin?

 

[Diddums]

So basically

Don't be that guy

 

[C Kent]

Don't be that guy

I did reference Cathy Newman prior to the edit

 

[ttaskmaster]

So basically you agree that an athlete that has benefited from being biologically male their entire life is perfectly fine to participate in women's athletics just as long as said advantage isn't by a huge margin?

Well, that is what the IAAF have basically enshrined in their regulations, and what the Court of Arbitration have arbitrarily arbitrated....

Genetically male, sure*. Biologically, not so sure.
I'm still not convinced by the IAAF's somewhat hokey science, nor by their 'impeccably upstanding moral highground'** in employing underhand tactics to publicly keel-haul peoples' lives under the pretense of fairness. Given the oppositions to all this, and the differing results of similar intersex rulings, I'd want to see more concrete and independent evidence that:

1) Any individual intersex athlete has an actual performance advantage.
2) That advantage is a result of a definitively male body.
3) That body advantage is a direct and proven result of testosterone, or:
3a) That their performance advantage is a direct result of high testosterone.

If several studies, that pass peer review acceptance, all concur, then you'd have a winner.


* Especially if they've gotten to world championship level without anyone (particularly sporting officials) telling them they're anything except female.
**This is sarcasm. They're bent as ****.

 

[dowie]

Also - Testosterone levels on the presumption that a high one confers a male advantage of 10-12% on average, by which the separation of male and female categories is justified, and where (according to CAS) a mere 2% (or 1.6%, depending on source) may not be so justified.

You still don't understand the flaw there if you agree with that.

I'm just going by what the regulator (and subsequently everyone else) states is the "male advantage" and comparing it to the results. It's what their regulations hinge upon, after all... and by their own standards, intersex athletes do not exhibit even half such an advantage.

But what the regulator said re: 10% isn't being disputed here. Why would you expect intersex males (yes I know they're officially classed as females in terms of their legal identity, pls don't start feigning confusion re: gender and legal identity again) to perform at that level? Essentially you'd want the subset of however many people with Caster's condition to contain a few people who are as fast as the very fastest males in the world... which isn't likely with any given, much smaller, sample of males as already highlighted. It's really basic and you don't seem to ba able to understand it.

Also: all I've done is state what the regulators have already decided" is iffy when you're actually just referring to some comment by the CAS that that advantage may not be sufficient, the regulator still requires Caster to limit her testosterone if you're going with this fingers in the ears, just arguing the status quo according to the regulator approach.

 

[C Kent]

and round and round we go again

DSD Regulations call out athletes as biologically male - Sports Integrity Initiative

Last week, two Namibian athletes were excluded from the Tokyo 2020 Olympics after being assessed under the DSD Regulations of World Athletics. It has been widely reported that the DSD Regulations (PDF below) seek to exclude ‘women’ whose testosterone levels exceed 5nmol/L from international...

www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com

 

[ttaskmaster]

You still don't understand the flaw there if you agree with that.

"The degree or magnitude of the advantage is therefore critical"
You seem to believe that any advantage is too much...

But what the regulator said re: 10% isn't being disputed here. Why would you expect intersex males (yes I know they're officially classed as females in terms of their legal identity, pls don't start feigning confusion re: gender and legal identity again) to perform at that level? Essentially you'd want the subset of however many people with Caster's condition to contain a few people who are as fast as the very fastest males in the world... which isn't likely with any given, much smaller, sample of males as already highlighted. It's really basic and you don't seem to ba able to understand it.

The only confusion is why you keep mentioning gender identity and legal identity, despite the many times I point out I'm deliberately ignoring that and only focussing on what actual, real, professional medical doctors have stated.
It seems as if you're continually returning to that deliberate misrepresentation in order to refute it...

And yes, I would expect to see anyone with a confirmed "male advantage" performing at least as fast as the average male in the 10-12% above females bracket. Even between the absolute fastest and the slowest women, of the 1300 in the Berman-Garnier's 2127 Observations, the difference was only 3%, though.
But more importantly, a 46 XY DSD is only banned from five events - They could still quite happily compete in 17 of the 22 events documented in the B-G 2127 study, despite this supposedly-massive "male advantage" they have.

What you're failing to argue, or even mention, is the potential for biological advantage that MAY lead to a performance advantage, but since potential does not equal actual, we're back to the CAS arbitration that "The degree or magnitude of the advantage is therefore critical" and "a 1% difference may not justify a separation".

Also: all I've done is state what the regulators have already decided" is iffy when you're actually just referring to some comment by the CAS that that advantage may not be sufficient, the regulator still requires Caster to limit her testosterone if you're going with this fingers in the ears, just arguing the status quo according to the regulator approach.

Yes it does, and it's absolute ******* bull ****.
The IAAF can now basically do whatever it likes with those regs, without oversight, without the possibility of appeal, and with only the flimsiest of suggestions of slight advantages derived from single source flawed data... Makes you wonder why all them smart science people are challenging the regulations, dunnit?

 

[dowie]

The only confusion is why you keep mentioning gender identity and legal identity, despite the many times I point out I'm deliberately ignoring that and only focussing on what actual, real, professional medical doctors have stated.

If you were ignoring it you'd not be taking issue with it all the time ergo there wouldn't be any need to respond to you doing exactly that!

And yes, I would expect to see anyone with a confirmed "male advantage" performing at least as fast as the average male in the 10-12% above females bracket.

Do you really not see that that wasn't what you were comparing... you're not looking at the average male, Semenya is way, way faster than the average male, she's faster than the fastest male amateur in the county of Kent (population circa 1.8 million).

You're citing some unnamed "smart science people" seemingly because you can't even address the obvious flaws in the argument you're using to support your position. No doubt you'll come back with some more quotes and tangential points and still fail to address it because you can't. The flaws are obvious and you can't avoid that.

 

[ttaskmaster]

If you were ignoring it you'd not be taking issue with it all the time ergo there wouldn't be any need to respond to you doing exactly that!

I take issue with your misrepresentation.

Do you really not see that that wasn't what you were comparing... you're not looking at the average male, Semenya is way, way faster than the average male, she's faster than the fastest male amateur in the county of Kent (population circa 1.8 million).

Are you really going to be THAT ******* obtuse?
I'm talking about IAAF ruling on Olympic level athletes and the event separation between their sexes. Nothing to do with some bell-end in Kent.

You're citing some unnamed "smart science people" seemingly because you can't even address the obvious flaws in the argument you're using to support your position. No doubt you'll come back with some more quotes and tangential points and still fail to address it because you can't. The flaws are obvious and you can't avoid that.

The names are in the links already posted. Seemingly you can't read.
The flaws are your own assumptions and strawman retorts, as I have repeatedly reminded you.

 

[dowie]

Are you really going to be THAT ******* obtuse?
I'm talking about IAAF ruling on Olympic level athletes and the event separation between their sexes. Nothing to do with some bell-end in Kent.

I'm simply addressing your claims, you claimed: "I would expect to see anyone with a confirmed "male advantage" performing at least as fast as the average male in the 10-12% above females bracket."

But she does beat the average man, and your expectation that she should be beating the world's best females by 10-12% if she has any male advantage is clearly flawed for the reasons already pointed out.

The average man won't beat the top female runners in the world, let alone beat them by 10-12%. Even a very good male runner from a smaller sample of say 2 million (say a county-level runner) likely wouldn't do so... so why would you expect Semenya to? You can't address that point so you just squirm and deflect from it as you have done for a few days now.

The names are in the links already posted. Seemingly you can't read.
The flaws are your own assumptions and strawman retorts, as I have repeatedly reminded you.

The problem is you can't back up your claims so you make these vague references to things you've quoted. There is an obvious flaw in your argument you refuse to address and now you're left with just vague references to "smart science people" who you won't actually quote.

Instead of sperging out next time why not calm down a bit and try to respond to the argument? Do you understand the criticism here re: your expectation for Caster. I genuinely don't know if you're still having numeracy issues there and so not following it or if you have understood and now realise you don't have a response to it (as it's correct) so you just deflect instead?

 

[ttaskmaster]

I'm simply addressing your claims, you claimed: "I would expect to see anyone with a confirmed "male advantage" performing at least as fast as the average male in the 10-12% above females bracket."
But she does beat the average man, and your expectation that she should be beating the world's best females by 10-12% if she has any male advantage is clearly flawed for the reasons already pointed out.

Oh, you really ARE being that ******* obtuse.... I didn't realise you needed to have everything spelled out for you every single time.
OKAY then........Let's go right down the ******* Dowie hole and play your ******* game, then.......

I would expect Caster Semenya OR ANY OTHER INTERSEX OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE, who is alleged to have a confirmed "male advantage", to perform somewhere close to the 10-12% above ANY FEMALE OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE, which defines the performance gap between female OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETES and "male-advantaged" OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETES, and thus justifies the reason for, and regulation of, the separation of the sexes in OLYMPIC LEVEL competitions.

Nothing to do with average humans across the entire population, nor in any County of Kent events, as we are CLEARLY talking about the World Athletics Championships and so CLEARLY discussing athletes who are decidedly above the average. It is to be presumed therefore that all discussions and studies, particularly those that specify their subjects and measures were only competitors in WAC events, that we are actually talking about OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETES in all cases.

The problem is you can't back up your claims so you make these vague references to things you've quoted. There is an obvious flaw in your argument you refuse to address and now you're left with just vague references to "smart science people" who you won't actually quote.

OK, you want a quote-fest, too.
I can do that.
Doubtless you'll claim any single quote is considered out of context, so either you get a bunch of links to the articles, or I post the full text of the articles, and either way you won't read any of it.... Which would you prefer?

 

[dowie]

I would expect Caster Semenya OR ANY OTHER INTERSEX OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE, who is alleged to have a confirmed "male advantage", to perform somewhere close to the 10-12% above ANY FEMALE OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE

Why would you expect that though? Do you really not see why that would be a flawed expectation?

That's all I'm asking you and you don't seem to have an argument for it and can't respond to the criticism of it.

I even tried to pre-empt this:

Instead of sperging out next time why not calm down a bit and try to respond to the argument?

I don't understand why you've just come back in to rant again and you're again completely deflecting

 

[C Kent]

I would expect Caster Semenya OR ANY OTHER INTERSEX OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE, who is alleged to have a confirmed "male advantage", to perform somewhere close to the 10-12% above ANY FEMALE OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETE, which defines the performance gap between female OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETES and "male-advantaged" OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETES, and thus justifies the reason for, and regulation of, the separation of the sexes in OLYMPIC LEVEL competitions.

Why are you fixated on this 10-12% figure? You know the difference between the best male and female 100m sprinters is approx 9.65% right for example? Or that the difference between marathon runners is around 6.5%, 5k is 13%, Javelin the difference shoots up to 30%.

Hell, in the 2016 Olympics the slowest mens 100m time was 11.81 seconds, all the women that finished the 100m final did so faster, as a counter the fastest woman in the Olympics wouldn't have even got past the 1st round if she was competing with the men. Biological men v biological women and yet the performance levels of OLYMPIC LEVEL ATHLETES differs, the only thing that doesn't ever change is that biological males have an innate advantage over biological females when it comes to sporting events.

 

[Sankari]

Caster Semenya is male, and has an intersex condition that only occurs in males.