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

[dowie]

Yes, but she's a male (xy chromosome) who doesn't respond properly to male androgen, so developed as a woman, albeit she is only partially insensitive, so developed partly male.

Well she didn't really develop as a woman she just didn't properly develop a male penis and her balls didn't drop and so has been identified as a woman pretty much since birth...

Semenya seems to have partial androgen insensitivity, so has developed, to some extent, some secondary female characteristics like breasts and hips, but has also developed some secondary male characteristics, like a deep voice and muscle mass. She gets some benefit from testosterone, but not as much as a man would.

What is that based on?

The below is from that runners forum related to the article posted - Serena is a female who has had some rather silly conspiracy theory like accusations of being male in the past and some defenders of Caster seem to be under the impression that she's suffering from the same criticism and is just a strong African woman etc...

I don't see the hips or breasts you're referring to though on Caster, Serena on the other hand, a biological woman, clearly does have them.

 

[dowie]

Semenya definitely has breasts, just look around at other pics. Not large ones, obvs (she is intersex after all), but it's not a proper man's chest.

I remember a Serena=man thread on here where pics were chosen that suggested she had no hips. And now she's selected as example of womanly physique

No she’s selected as an example of a butch muscular woman who clearly has female hips and breast.

On the other hand Caster has a male physique. She doesn’t have female hips or breasts.

 

[dowie]

I'd dispute that. She definitely has breasts, albeit not obvious in all pics.

You haven't provided anything to dispute it though, you've just repeated a baseless claim. Where are these pics where she has breasts?

 

[dowie]

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/iaaf-caster-semenya-human-rights-1.5115453
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/48114137
https://www.timeslive.co.za/sport/2019-05-02-im-a-die-hard-thats-a-fact-caster-semenya/

As a man, I'd be happy to have guns like hers, but I'd be a bit embarrassed to carry those jugs.

Just looks like pectoral muscles, only the first one slightly looks like breasts but given the multiple other photos out there of her in tight tops with just the outline of pectoral muscles I'm calling BS on that.

I note you've decided not to carry on with your assertion of her having female hips.

 

[dowie]

And those aren't pecs. Be real.

This is her running in high school, back when she had less muscle mass, less defined pecs... we'd still expect to see breasts though if she had those:



She's got the body of a teenage boy there, not sure about these "female hips" either... I think you're just making things up.

 

[dowie]

No, and IMO nobody should be penalised for being born with a natural advantage that makes them physically superiour to 99% of the population, hell that describes EVERY SINGLE OLYMPIAN... >.>

Exactly, the people coming up with "what about [olympic sprinter] and their long stride etc.." are missing the point, that is simply a natural advantage, unless we're segregating based on that then it is irrelevant.

Ian Thorpe won 37 gold medals in swimming and has SIZE 17 FEET. The guy has flippers. No one complains - after all "it's natural". Should a promising swimmer be able to have his/her feet surgically 'lengthened'? What about surgically webbed hands?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with this argument - do you think people should complain about that? It seems fairly obvious why no one complains about it, because it is irrelevant - we don't segregate swimmers based on the size of someone's feet.

Hormone levels seem to offer a clearer link to athletic performance and any "unfair" advantage. But where does this stop?

If Caster reduces her hormones to "normal" female levels then does she still have the benefits of a skeleton and muscle attachments that come with "male" growth patterns and adolescence? Sadly she is an innocent 'drugs cheat' who unwittingly and through no fault of her own has been taking testosterone for years. A bit like the East German athletes in the 70s and 80s.

I think they should just have a third category for trans and intersex athletes (or at least intersex athletes fitting certain criteria whereby they benefit from male advantages).

Or just make it clear that "male" is the open category and "female" is protected to XX females + intersex females who fit certain criteria.

I think, given the CAS previous ruling and the narrow scope of the current restrictions + evidence required to just get limits imposed for selected running events that this will be an ongoing debate for some time. There are other obvious areas where things like bone structure/height advantages etc.. of trans or intersex athletes will be an issue such as basketball various martial arts etc... We might still have further issues in future with say an intersex sprinter with male advantages who doesn't have to suppress their hormones if they carry on identifying as female and competing leading to further legal challenges etc..

Personally - I feel terribly sorry for her. But now she knows the truth of her situation (even if we don't) can she really feel that she is winning? Surely it must feel like an over 18s rugby team beating a U12 team - a bit hollow.

She's known for over a decade now though, maybe this is a view for Reddit's "Am I the *******" but I don't really feel sorry for her anymore, while this should have been handled behind the scenes and her medical tests shouldn't have been leaked etc.. she has carried on competing against biological females knowing full well that she isn't one and that she's got a clear (male) advantage. It is an inherently selfish thing to do, especially when she's been actively fighting against what is at least a reasonable compromise to try and reduce her advantage and still allow her to compete.

 

[dowie]

Am I wrong in thinking that the events she runs at she hasn't broken any of the world records that stand for most of the events that she runs in? so with that in mind people before her without those advantages have set faster world records. I mean you could say those athletes may have been on drugs I guess I don't know but if that isn't the case those times still stand as the world records.

You do realise the women's 800m world record is the longest standing world record in athletics? It was set by a women aged 32 who rather suspiciously got quicker during her late 20s... it would be rather hard to break these days without doping. Likewise she also at one time had the 400m record, though was beaten by the only other woman to break 48 seconds... again set in the 1980s by someone from behind the iron curtain who very likely was doping.

Caster probably could have broken it if she tried, there has been quite a lot of speculation that she's generally held back in races so as not to generate even more controversy.

Personally I think its unfair when she has no control over it and being forced to do this just screams that there have been to many complaints from salty athletes that cant get close. Best thing to happen would be for her to take the treatment and then still dominate the completion. Although I still don't agree with it. But that's my view with my limited understanding.

Can you be more specific with regards to what exactly do you think is unfair here - do you think anyone who simply identifies as female should be able to compete for example? Like would it be unfair to prevent say a trans-female from competing too? Do you believe we should have separate male and female events?

 

[dowie]

so if it ain't male or female then what is it?

Intersex

She would have otherwise been born a man but didn’t develop properly. She has XY chromosomes, internal testes/balls that didn’t drop but her penis didn’t develop and she still has an opening/vagina (but no womb or ovaries).

Because she has internal testes she has very high testosterone levels for a “woman” as she has some level of sensitivity to it she’s rather muscular/has a much more masculine body than regular women and has a deep voice.

I mean you could say she’s basically a bloke whose **** didn’t develop but that would be rude and not quite accurate, she’s been identified as and raised as female since birth.

(Though is a lesbian too and often wears male clothing).

 

[dowie]

Question is, where do you bring her test levels down to? The average? Seems like that more unfair to him/her as then anyone who's mildly above average by genetic chance is at an advantage.

Given that most of these people are unlikely to be particularly exceptional athletes otherwise then at the international level you can be rather generous with the T levels, I believe the current compromise (which only affects some specific running events) gives plenty of scope for T levels well above the average female.

Though there are still additional advantages to having developed with a male-ish (to different degrees) physique in the case of some intersex athletes and literally having developed as male in the case of trans, that can still be rather unfair.

If looking at it from a less emotive perspective without all the extra baggage surrounding gender identity etc.. then the fairer solution would be either a third category for intersex* and trans athletes or having them compete in the male category. (With the emotive angle then male category requires re-branding as "other" or essentially the non-XX female category)


*those with male advantages - those few intersex athletes who don't have male advantages can compete with the female category.

 

[dowie]

It's like those people who say a "trans-woman" can have a "woman's penis".

That is part of the argument with lesbians and TERFs - if a SJW takes an absolutist position re: a trans-woman is a woman no ifs no buts then there can be some absurd but logically consistent arguments that follow.

For example penis in vagina sex can be defined by SJWs as "lesbian sex" if the person with the penis defines themselves as female. Lesbians and straight men who don't want to date trans-women are "transphobic" etc..

 

[dowie]

From the studies I've read, testosterone level is not a reliable predictor of performance and in a number of cases, performance with both genders was better when levels were lower.
Overall there seem to be very erratic results and not much to strongly substantiate even a broad correlation between T-levels and athletic performance.

The complicated truth about testosterone’s effect on athletic performance

The debate over whether to allow female athletes with high testosterone to compete with other women has been heated, but not backed by a lot of science. That's because there simply isn't much out there, though that's not to say we can't draw some important conclusions from what we do know.

www.popsci.com

There's a bit of bait and switch going on in that article... for a start:

If you give a person testosterone, society considers it a performance enhancer. If you naturally have lots of the hormone, though, it’s a competitive advantage—if you’re a man. But if you’re a woman, at least according to some of the biggest sports associations in the world, it’s just plain unfair.

Caster is a man, biologically so they appear to have already conceded that it is a competitive advantage... that you can muddle things with female athletes because of the presence of multiple factors isn't necessarily relevant for her.

“There are certainly a number of factors that affect athletic performance and testosterone is certainly only one of those factors,” says Joanna Harper, a medical physicist at Loughborough University who focuses on trans athletes. “However, if you’re looking for factors that differentiate male performance from female performance, the majority of biologists feel that testosterone is the primary factor that distinguishes that.”

Of course, males having other factors that benefit them applies to Castor too, so arguably even testosterone limits aren't necessarily fair... in some sports things like a height advantage, for example, may be important etc..

 

[dowie]

If someone is a woman then they should be allowed to compete in women's sport. As far as I'm aware, the original court case involved full medical checks of Caster that established Caster was male, both chromosonally and as regards organs that were present.

He's just trying some semantic argument here, by "medically recognised as women" he's presumably trying to include Caster as a "woman" who has been "medically recognised" as such in so far as she was (to use gender ideology lingo) "assigned female at birth" by a doctor.

It's got no bearing on the reality that she's a biological male with the advantages that come with being a biological male, it's just an attempt at obfuscation because there isn't really any justification to support a pro-Caster argument.

Likewise, this is the obvious problems terms like "cis", grifters can accurately (according to gender ideology) state things like this:

Technically that is correct by definition as trans people are defined as people who have transitioned from their "gender assigned at birth" and Caster is in trans lingo "AFAB" or "assigned female at birth" and because she still identifies as female today she is therefore "cis".

So that term is not much use here unless you want to obfuscate... a more accurate term would be "biological male" but that's seen in some circles as bigoted and triggering etc..

Likewise, there is a Chinese youtuber who was "AMAB" or "assigned male at birth" for cultural reasons to please grandparents (boys are preferred in China) in reality she's a biological female and today identifies as female... but according to trans ideology she's "trans" because she differs from the official gender assignment at birth. The ideology isn't based on reality but just technicalities relating to assigned and chosen identity.

 

[dowie]

He's actually raising a very specific point, to differentiate between a male deliberately pretending to be female, and an individual that has been told she is a female all her life.
It's one thing to just say you're female and have someone shoot that down... but to be told this and raised as this, and to then base your career and your life on this, only for someone else to suddenly come along and forcibly alter your sex for you is an entirely different can of moral worms.

She knows full well what she is and has known for years now... whether she knew as a kid or not isn't a good basis for any argument here and is perhaps just a criticism of the lack of development of the SA healthcare system and/or SA doctors.

I'm still waiting to hear some official medical confirmation of any specific condition, as well as any proven advantage her condition provides.

It's literally on her wiki page with a citation to a Guardian article:

Wikipedia:

Semenya is an intersex woman,[8] with 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency,[9] assigned female at birth,[10] with XY chromosomes and natural heterogametic testosterone level.[11][12][13][14]

Guardian quoting CAS:

In its decision it also said that 46 XY 5-ARD (5-alpha-reductase deficiency) athletes – such as Semenya – have “circulating testosterone at the level of the male 46 XY population and not at the level of the female 46 XX population. This gives 46 XY 5-ARD athletes a significant sporting advantage over 46 XX female athletes.”

 

[dowie]

It still doesn't go into much detail substantiating the presumed testosterone advantage, beyond taking as a given that it is accepted, and even then the CAS has noted the concerns over the validity of that presumption, but states that it is beyond their remit to substantiate it.

Presumed? Also it's not just testosterone, she's a biological male, that she has a micro peen and a hole is kinda irrelevant to that, you do understand that males have an advantage in athletics right?

Does she... and do you?

Yes, and yes as already stated.

Woman. Says so, right there.

She is genetically male and yet, in spite of this, most people, including you, still refer to her as a female. [...] and even now you're calling her female.

Nope, you're confusing gender identity, legal sex and biological sex here. I'm using the pronouns she uses in accordance with her (social) gender identity and I'm pointing out that she's biologically a male, there is no contradiction there just misunderstanding on your part.

 

[dowie]

Yes, presumed.

Nope, do you not understand why there are separate events for males and females? It's not a presumption... it's real differences.

Her karyotype has been confirmed, and her disorder seemingly substantiated, yet her degree and position on the spectrum of presentation has not, beyond conflicting anecdotes from some of those with whom she's shared a changing room. So it's quite funny to see your obsession with "micro-peens" again arise, yet you have also not substantiated this assumption, either... unless you have seen something while peeping through holes in her locker room?

Doesn't need to be established... the size of her clit or micro peen has zero bearing on athletic performance which was the point... you've totally missed that it seems.

I'm not misunderstanding anything. This thread is about someone's biological sex, specifically excluding legal sex or social identity. I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies that make it a complex and compounded issue.

You were misunderstanding you thought I'd referred to her as being female by using the pronouns she prefers, that's conflating biological sex and gender. If you understood that you'd not have needed to question it nor would you be saying it's complicated when it isn't.

 

[dowie]

Yes, I understand the reasons for the separate categories. That's not the point I am addressing.

Why not address it? She's a biological male after all.

I also understand the reason why biological males with androgen insensitivity are allowed to compete in the female category. The fact that they do compete, and offer considerable competition, suggests that testosterone is not the driving factor in performance.... but then, you already know this, because I've made that point before.

Why? Are you confused by people with partial sensitivity or are you confused by the presence of other factors impacting performance? It's unclear what argument you're attempting to make there or how it relates to this case?

Whether or not she has a micro-peen is clearly of immense significance, as you frequently assert that she has one. That you continue to bring it up shows that establishing it as undeniabe fact is quite obviously important to you, even when by your own admission it is not relevant to the discussion.

No that doesn't logically follow, I didn't say it's not relevant to the discussion, try to read more carefully, you're just getting confused over quite straightforward arguments yet again. That she's got odd junk is the reason for her identity, it has nothing directly to do with athletic performance (read my post again where I literally said that already). How is that hard to follow?

And again, no, there is no misunderstanding.
The source you cited specifically said she's a woman. Not genetic male, who identifies as female, or anything like that. Woman.

Are you sure about that as it appears you're still conflating gender and sex... do you want to try again - what specifically is the issue with the source calling her a woman?

I can call her a woman too.. so what?

 

[dowie]

Because the point being addressed is about testosterone itself, and naturally high levels of it, and the question over whether athletes of either sex have any advantage over their genetic and biological peers as a result.

That's not a good reason to ignore this point.

Because some genetic males are allowed to compete as women, where others are not, just on the basis of their body's response to natural testosterone during competitive performance... yet you still say it's not just about testosterone.

Correct greater athletic ability in males is not just about current levels of testosterone, you pointing out that fact re: those specific types of males doesn't negate what I said. Do you not understand why they might differ somewhat? That they've not gone through male puberty for example?

The only confusion is why you would make such an assertion in the face of that, when it is clearly the only thing being measured.

That's on you.

I'm discussing testosterone and a regulation based on it.
You directly respond to that with, "that she has a micro peen and a hole is kinda irrelevant to that".
I not ony question the accuracy of that oddly specific assertion and wonder how you have come to believe this to be a fact, but also its relevance, with the presumption that it must have some else you'd not bother to mention it.

In short - How d'ya know she's got a dick, Dowie?

Basic anatomy, she's intersex, the "clit" is the dick. That's how human fetuses start out.

It doesn't matter to the regulations what she identifies as - This is about "biology rather than legal status", and since Semenya and several other athletes are being put through the wringer over their genetics, it seems a considerably disingenuous **** take to then start using 'gender identity' terms at them, while at the same time declaring them something else.

Why make a fuss over it then? You're just going off on some pointless tangent, either you understand that there was a reference to gender in using her prefered pronouns in which case there is no contradiction there or you didn't understand that and it's now been clarified for you - either way whats the relevance here?

And yet the current regulations do allow some genetic males to compete in womens' sports...

In rather different circumstances.. what is your point?

But the 'fairness' is simply about everybody having to go through the same hardships. So to be fair, why not genetically test males - It's not going to impact them in any way (right?) and it shows solidarity with their female counterparts.

Because that doesn't achieve anything, you're advocating for some pointless, intrusive exercise to take place out of some vague personal belief that it will show "solidarity" you don't have a strong argument there.

 

[dowie]

Doesn't matter - I'm talking specifically about natural testosterone levels and the regulations that hinge solely on this value.

In relation to a completely different intersex type... what is your point?

Oh, if you're taking that road, then she actually has a clit just without the 'broken chromosome' mutilation to make it a 'dick'... since that's how humans start out.
Either way, you have made an assertion without providing any proof beyond a common assumption that since some 5αR2D people present with an actual micropenis that Semenya does too.

It's the same thing, what is the relevance here, why are you taking issue with some description that has nothing to do with athletic ability?

I didn't make a fuss over it - You did.
My point has remained unchanged since before you stuck your oar in.

You did - you feigned confusion/highlighted an apparent contradiction in me referring to her as a biological male and using she/her pronouns when there is no contradiction. I didn't stick my oar in you directly addressed that complaint at me and I replied to you... you don't appear to have a point there and unsurprisingly are now being evasive.

Both circumstances hinge on the flawed assumption, by both the IAAF and others, that high levels of natural testosterone provide ongoing performance advantages.

That's not a flawed assumption in the cases where people are sensitive to it.

No more pointless than subjecting women to intrusive examinations and regulations based on science that medical specialists refute as flawed...
Who knows, you might even find some of these 'men' are actually genetic females... and just maybe you'll actually find evidence of doping which, after all, is the purpose for which the IAAF originally (mis)represented these tests.

No there is a clear reason there.

 

[dowie]

You stuck your oar in when you claimed I was "trying" a semantic argument, yet here you are arguing the very same semantics.
Saying you refer to her as 'her' out of some assumed respect for her gender identity is not much use here unless you want to obfuscate.

Eh? It's got nothing to do with obfuscating anything. I simply referred to her as "her", which doesn't constitute an argument about sex, nor is referring to her as "her" and stating that she's a biological male a contradiction, I've got no idea why you're hung up on that?

If you do understand that those things (gender identity and biological sex) are often referred to separately these days then what point are you even trying to argue there? If you didn't and it was previously unclear it shouldn't be hard to follow now it's been clarified for you.

The only other points you seem to have here are that testosterone isn't relevant for people with a completely different condition who aren't affected by it (so what?) and some wierd argument that people entering male events should be tested too for "solidarity"?

 

[dowie]

OK, so when I address a specific perspective that does not include an individual's identity, you incorrectly "presume" that I am "conflating" the terms, in an "attempt to obfuscate", which you imply is not a good thing, and yet you seem to think it's fine for you to adopt that same approach, because you're doing it out of "respect"?

I've got no idea why you're stuck on that when it's so basic, referring to her as "her" and stating she's biologically male is not contradictory or an attempt to obfuscate. It's just treating gender identity and biological sex as separate things.

Meanwhile, my point as to the issue remains:
Someone born externally male-presenting can get modified (medicinally and/or surgically) and is allowed to compete as a female.
Someone born externally female-presenting cannot compete as a female, without being forced to under go surgical or medicinal modification.

You've just made two assertions/observations, it's missing an argument.

In both cases, either subset of biological males will need to lower their testosterone levels if they wish to compete with females - what exactly is your issue with that? You seemed to think that testosterone doesn't have much effect on performance and yet Caster seems quite keen to remove the limits and didn't perform as well under them, strange that.

I don't personally think trans "women" should be able to compete (your first example) but that doesn't affect whether or not intersex "women" competing is fair or not if in both cases they've been through male puberty.

(Have added " " around "women" so as to avoid any more feigned confusion re: gender identity on your part.)