Human Rights Watch have a go at World Athletics- over testing

Yes because Ross Tucker and possible some of the other scientists/ethicists/lawyers etc who have been involved can now see there is no evidence to support XY athletes in women’s sport if your priority is fairness and safety.

He’s been at the heart of two big issues in women’s sport and basically come out the other side as a massive tf

They really should learn to stop saying "listen to trans people" or "educate yourself"...

The Guardian’s reporting really does hide the real issue. They should hang their head in shame like HRW.

I also concur with Sopho. Ross Tuckers podcasts on the Semenya case are fascinating. What I particularly liked was the scientific journey he has made. He was part of CS legal team at CAS in the early part of this year. The podcast he did at that time is good and represents a certain position. Then he’s been involved in the World Rugby trans workshop. He follows up the CS case with another podcast I’m September when the court upheld World Athletics’ decision and what’s very telling is a subtle shift in tone and thought about the sanctity of women’s sport.
He’s been at the heart of two big issues in women’s sport and basically come out the other side as a massive t**f

www.womenarehuman.com/male-trans-athlete-wins-three-paralymic-gold-medals-in-womens-running-events/

Or there is this one - I wonder how many Olympic runners there are aged 46 and still winning medals?? I wondered previously what the registered disability was for this runner and apparently it is restricted vision

Good discussion from Save Women's Sports where Sharron Davies spoke passionately on this. Also lots of other good people like Emma Hilton there being fantastic:

Either the women's category is a restricted class or it isn't.

If it is a restricted class, some people (in this case the 50% of the population that are male) are not eligible, and that will have to be enforced.

What practical suggestions are HRW making for enforcing the restriction? How would they do it differently?

How do HRW feel about qualification assessments for the Paralympics? Are they "policing of peoples' bodies based on arbitrary definitions of disability and racial stereotypes"?

("Racial stereotypes" makes as much sense as it does there applied to women's sport, so just left it...)

There is a sort of serious point here in that athletics dug a hole for itself by stopping routine testing. Previously every athlete competing at high level in female sports would have a chromosome test. It was routine, therefore not some sort of arbitrary "they look suspiciously male". So you couldn't have the "profiling" complaint.

If the new arbitrary non-universal checks are deemed objectionable, then they will have to return to the routine cheek swabs. It's not clear why the swabs were stopped - wasn't it just "it might be a bit of a shock to find out you've got a Y chromosome" if CAIS/PAIS?

As Sharron Davies has pointed out, this is a test that needs to be done EXACTLY ONCE IN A CAREER. Unlike the EXTREMELY intrusive urine testing for drugs and associated movement monitoring all high-level athletes are continuously subject to. To make a fuss about 1 cheek swab compared to that is laughable. She strongly advocates returning to that regime.

I'm also not sure the chromosome tests used covered all potential DSDs - do they catch the relocated SRY gene ones?

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/disability-sport/47983123

But it’s essential because unsurprisingly there is always someone looking to get around the rules:

www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-45553010

@NotBadConsidering

Ask the three women - Melissa Bishop, Joanna Jóźwik and Lynsey Sharp - who missed out on medals in the Rio Olympics 800m final because there were three males ahead of them if they’re happy to undergo sex verification to protect the integrity of women’s sport. Or any of the women from the global south who didn’t win any Diamond League money when they finished behind Semenya on multiple occasions.

On the Semenya topic, I highly recommend listening to Ross Tuckers podcast “the real science of sport”. Ross has a total grasp of the issue, and while they’re a bit long and possibly nerdy (which I like, to be honest), they’re fascinating.

I would imagine female athletes would be happy with sex testing. I recall Sharon Davies said it was common when she was competing and I think her point was fairness and not “policing her body”.
It’s a strange argument, maybe human rights watch haven’t actually asked any female athletes?

How does this work with testing for disabilities?

Ask the three women - Melissa Bishop, Joanna Jóźwik and Lynsey Sharp - who missed out on medals in the Rio Olympics 800m final because there were three males ahead of them if they’re happy to undergo sex verification to protect the integrity of women’s sport. Or any of the women from the global south who didn’t win any Diamond League money when they finished behind Semenya on multiple occasions.

Which is more important to women? Does the fact that they may feel it's degrading to have to be tested mean that they would rather not be tested even if that means men can compete ? Are feelings different in sports that have already been impacted by female presenting DSD males ?

When will these organisations present the truth. Will this report include the phrase ‘males or females with DSDs’ rather than simply referring to them as ‘females’ because it is unclear and with medical exploration these ‘females’ are males with DSDs. Which is completely a differenf discussion.

So, yes, a female who is qualifying ahead of other women but has a stride that reflects a males should be investigated. Because stride is something that shows a biological advantage for males and because of bone structure differs between male and female.

Honesty and accuracy is needed as well as sensitivity in reporting this. However, this does need to be addressed as we can certainly see the effect of not addressing it. Medals and sponsorship go to those who are ‘women’ with male DSDs so that females are missing out.

And of course males are not assessed in the same way. I have never heard of a female winning a male athletics event at that level. Kinda proves males have some mythical advantage ... or just that males with or without disorders or medication have advantage in sports...

Sex testing in women’s sport is not new. They’ve been doing it from the 1930s. Athletes used to have to basically price what was in their knickers until chromosome testing came along.
The question for HRW: if sex testing has been happening for 90 years, why do you think the authorities have been doing that?

Fun fact: Princess Anne is the only Olympic athlete to be excused from the sex testing in the 70s.

Could they produce an example of a woman - a biological female - from the global south who underwent testing as a result of speculation around her appearance and body and was subsequently confirmed to be a woman, thus justifying any concern?

Or is it just males who got caught?

“Don’t police the bodies of those in women’s competitions in case you find males competing and hurt their feelings.”

Isn't this strange...Amnesty stepping out of it's role to become the beacon of transrights instead of making the world listen to the plight of political prisoners and here we have Human Rights watch doing the same. I'm assuming the protection of political prisoners is a little bit boring, so lets slot into the privileged world?????

I do understand one wouldn't want to be victimising, but this is sport and sport is a nasty business with state sponsored doping.wtf

So they’re saying athletes in the female category shouldn’t be checked to make sure they’re female, and to emphasise that point they’ve used three examples of biological males - Semenya, Chand and Negesa - to illustrate this point?! How idiotic can you get? The fact that these males were found to be competing against females justifies seeking them out FFS.

A report by the rights group, published on Friday, claims female runners are being pushed out of competitive events, which some rely on for their livelihoods.

Yes they are, but not the ones you claim .