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

[dowie]

In spite of the disabilities they are still elite level athletes, some of whom have beaten able-bodied elite level athletes. Clearly it follows that they'd be even better were it not for their disability.

That's true of DSD athletes too where they've got a partial male advantage, they'd be even better if not for that.

Intersex with male advantage are not elite enough to even compete against regular male athletes.

Nor are Paralympic athletes necessarily. It's the same issue in principle save for the semantics of whether the disadvantage they're born with si a "disability" or a medical condition.

 

[dowie]

You crayz, bru????!!!!
The whole point of the Paralympics is that Paralympians are still world class athletes in their own right.

Nope, there are plenty of people who were fit/amateur athlete level and wouldn't have been at the regular Olympics.

But with a qualifying disability, you can take a fit amature athlete level person and they can become a Paralympic athlete - which is why for example soldiers disabled in Afghanistan make for good candidates as potential Paralympic athletes - they'd not have been regular Olympians but as a generally fit person who is now minus a leg they're potential paralympians.

Read about our veterans in the paralympic games

We're extremely proud our performance military athletes represent their country at the Paralympic and Commonwealth games. Find out more.

www.helpforheroes.org.uk

Except that it's a flawed premise

It isn't, your premise is flawed as per the above. This is a similar situation to the Paralympics - some athletes have a disadvantage ergo we can have separate events for them.

First, you tried to oppose that idea by arguing semantics re: disability and now you're trying to put forth some flawed notion that the paralympic athletes would be in the regular Olympics but for their disability, some might but most wouldn't.

This is just another stats issue - the disabled population is a small fraction of the able-bodied population for a start and plenty of disabled people struggle with basic tasks let alone sports, you're talking about a relatively small pool of potential athletes and yet the number of athletes involved it's like nearly 5k athletes and 10k for the regular Olympics so clearly they're not all would have been regular Olympians but for disability far from it as the fit/injured soldier -> Paralympic athletes show.

 

[dowie]

Given the differences between their respective minimum performance qualifiers, most of the Paras would obviously be pretty close to regular Olympic qualifiers without the disability.

What do you mean?

If they are, as you assert, not even good enough to compete against regular non-elite athletes, then why do they have minimum performance qualifiers before even being selected? And how is it that Paras have managed to beat regular Olympians, in both events?

What assertion are you referring to?

They don't need a special event any more than a regular joe on the street would. What you're proposing is basically participation trophies for anyone who wants to feel special.

No, you're just being obtuse now - I'm proposing something akin to the Paralympics, the only difference being that DSD conditions don't come with the "disability" label... that's the argument being presented here.

All you've done so far is divert to arguing about the label disability and then pivot to making some flawed argument about the Paralympics being at the standard of the regular Olympics which is clearly wrong.

The argument is simply that we have separate events for people with a difference of ability due to a "disability" and that the same can apply here - if you can understand that then why not address it instead of all these tangents you keep on attempting?

 

[dowie]

Your assertion that Paralympians would not be Olympians without a disability.

Well most wouldn't as already pointed out.

I know what you're proposing and it doesn't need to exist, unless you want to include everyone else who simply can't make the Olympic grade.
There's no reason for it.

You could say the same about the Paralympics, the argument isn't about need as already pointed out.

You insisted on the label, initially trying to include DSDers under it.

No, I've repeatedly tried to get you to move away from the label aspect as it's irrelevant, rather it's the principle regardless of whether the label is used or not.

 

[dowie]

You say that, but have not supported it.

Yes, I have, read this post: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...py-for-future-olympics.18785068/post-37347380

The fact remains that the Paras were founded for those of Olympic standard who were too disadvantaged by disability for it to be a level playing field... long after disabled competitors were already competing (and sometimes winning) in the regular Olympics.

[citation needed]

They were formed for WW2 veterans, as pointed out in the other post-injured soldiers in recent years have taken party - they weren't necessarily Olympic level athletes before their injury but they were fit and had the potential to be fit amatures but with an injury they had a shot at the Paralympics.

It's there for representation, disabled people typically can't compete in the regular Olympics and have an obvious disadvantage so there is a separate event for them, there's a smaller pool of disabled people and multiple categories so obviously they're not going to be Olympic standard but for their disability.

Same principle applies with DSD - they've got a disadvantage from a specific condition they have ergo there could be separate events for them for the same reasons.

 

[dowie]

Some can and do compete in the regular Olympics.

No one denied that, it's the general claim that you were asked to back up and you can't as it's incorrect.

Their disabilities mean it's not a sufficiently level playing field, so in the interests of fairness the Paras exist.

The same argument can be made for DSD athletes.

It doesn't mean they aren't of Olympic standard, even with the disabilities, and the entry requirements show this - You're just confusing yourself over that poor assumption.

It's not a poor assumption, there are multiple categories and the pool of competitors is smaller. Injured soldiers who were not (or never would have been) Olympians before their injuries become competitors in the Paralympics.