Views on androgen insensitivity and women’s sport participation

Of course they are men they have the SRY gene. That is the definition of being male.

If the separation between men and women exists, then it should be adhered to. If people want to make the argument that the separation is unnecessary, then that is a separate issue.

People like Caster Semenya have a type of DSD that only occurs in people of the male sex - regardless of what was recorded on their birth certificates due to lack of awareness of the condition. Sex is the determining factor.

Yes, people like Caster Semenya and Imane Khelif still went through male puberty - and even without a sex test or scientific evidence you can see that with your own eyes.

It is a difference that exists - a difference which has many implications, impacts and effects.

That is the key issue for me too

and also where that sporting performance sits in the male and female distributions

The key issues for me are the protection of female integrity and fairness,

So which athletes are you referring to; or are you simply wanting to have a theoretical discussion?

Just looked at the instagram clip, and I have to say that person seems to be heavily 'performing gender'. Is that a compensatory activity do you think?

I did a bit of digging on this one a few years back. Even shooting is separated because male muscles are better at holding the gun steady over long periods of time in a competition.

The only sports I know of where men and women compete as equals are the ones where most of the muscle power is provided by a horse and ultra long distance competitions where fat stores, slow twitch muscle and pain resistance are of an advantage to women.

Apparently the male advantage seen in marathons of 26 and a bit miles disappear almost completely at the 100 mile race length point.

It's perhaps still worth noting though that in spite of the fact that the vast majority of show jumping and event riders below FEI elite level are female, men are hugely over represented on the medal podiums. There are mental as well as physical things going on in sport.

Have to say I don't think that a person with XY chromosomes should be permitted into the female category. No! It is unfortuante for them that they have this condition whilst also wanting to play sports - but i don't think their condition over-rules the general rights of female people to single sex sporting catgeories.

Because you were telling me off about using the term “male pelvis”!

@Lexibletheflexible

Where it really doesn't matter, we should probably have those sports be mixed at a professional level to increase participation but that's another subject entirely.

Do you understand how vanishingly few sports that is and that it already happens in those sports?

Why are people so keen to find ways to over-rule and over-ride the protections afforded to female people( as a integral group) - in the interests of a few male people ( regardless of their condition or identity)?

Which you countered by introducing a whole new load of stuff about soft tissues around the pelvis.

Your original point mentioned only the bones and my response related only to the bones.

I'm glad we agree.

You cannot exclude men from women's sports using their pelvis shape as a criteria, or identity a trans person that way, because it is shared by up to 25%. of women.

We merely need Female and Open categories.

Men with dwarfism may have have a lower sporting performance then men without dwarfism. And potentially less then women. Should they compete with women too?

Just because a male genetic condition causes a man to look less obviously 'manly' doesn't make them a woman and doesn't reduce their performance to match one.

Once again. Disadvantaged/vulnerable men are men. They don't get to compete with women just because we feel sorry for them.

Your argument about hysterectomies is bizarre. Athletes are young and start their sport even younger. No child is getting a hysterectomy, and no sane surgeon would give one to even an eighteen year old either without medical reason yes having female anatomy will have effected their ability to perform and train and compete for years.

One test. Male or female. That's it.

If someone is male, then they are male - despite disorders that mean that their body may not express all that male-ness in the usual manner.

I don't see the need to prove that people with CAIS do or don't have advantage over females. The rule is male vs. female, so use the cheap, easy SRY test and keep it simple. Anything else is just nibbling at boundaries in an attempt to find a loophole.

People with CAIS need to know that they have this condition (and in most places in the world, will know it before adulthood) as it has serious health implications for them. The world needs to be accepting of DSDs, and of gender non-conformity (which it generally is) without trying to use them to override the existence of sex.

No, my original post, if you re-read it, said pelvic floor in the second paragraph.

We do agree. But I am not guilty of what you accused me of.