IAAF and the Semena Case

[MillytantForceit]

IAAF denies Times report that they want to call Caster Semena a male athlete if she refuses to lower her testosterone:

www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-response-to-media-report

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/47233633

IAAF case looks good. A win for Semena would be seismic and perhaps the end of female athletics.

I honestly think that this should just come down to chromosomes.
If you have a Y chromosome you are male.
It is hard on people with a disorder of sexual development, but these are rare, and, tbh, I think where there is doubt, it is better to know as early as possible.
As a student nurse I cared for an obviously male (tall, muscular, male physique) 17 year old on a gynae ward. They had been born with ambiguous genitalia and raised as a girl.
Very difficult and sad for the individual.
Nowadays it is possible to check in cases of doubt and I think that is the kindest way.

Nowadays it is possible to check in cases of doubt and I think that is the kindest way.

But this is unlikely to happen in very poor areas of Africa like where Caster grew up is it?

That would be amazing. Would it? Why would she bother training? Who would sponsor her? What would be the bloody point?

What would really be amazing would be that we stop discussing her, as an individual. What would be amazing is the IAAF and other sporting bodies start putting out meaningful statements with 'doable', science based operating procedures.

Even if that is admitting that once you have been diagnosed as an intersex male, or have transitioned male to female, you can no longer compete due to the inherent advantages you have over women - unless you wish to compete as a male, of course!

Alternatively let transwomen do what all other sports people had to do, start their own league, find sponsors, an audience and work towards being included in International sporting federations.

And let those with intersex conditions work with the federations for themselves, without all the daft 'whataboutery'

It isn't that long since women had parity in the IAAF - 1995!

Despite the first competitive female woman ski jumper having jumped in about 1860 (not a typo 1860 ) Gian Franco Kasper, head of international ski jumping was on record as late as 2005 as not wanting women to jump "in case they hurt themselves" He couldn't have lived with himself, apparently! He did retract his statement and the inaugural Olympic women's ski jump was on 2014!

There has always been a battle to get sport to be open and inclusive - especially for women with their delicate internal organs (not at all true as science will tell you). Yet now men want to be women we can forget that and just open the doors to anyone?

Mary I agree, I had missed the context, I sort of meant to say that after your last post, but sidetracked myself!

Of course you are right NerrSnerr.
But I think that once it does become a high profile issue, in terms of sport for example, there has to be an agreement around one basic rule for everyone. I think the presence of a Y chromosome is as good as, or better than, any other argument.

I honestly think that this should just come down to chromosomes.
If you have a Y chromosome you are male

Many intersex people don’t know they have a Y chromosome until they are tested.

I don’t know caster’s diagnosis, but If she has external female genitalia and was raised female she may have had no clue she was intersex until she was tested after winning various events.

If she has a condition like Androgen Insensitive Syndrome she would be genetically XY, and phenotypically female (externally).

A condition like AIS wouldn’t confer an advantage either as the body is insenstive to testosterone, so would have no effect even if levels are very high.

""However, if a DSD athlete has testes and male levels of testosterone, they get the same increases in bone and muscle size and strength and increases in haemoglobin that a male gets when they go through puberty, which is what gives men such a performance advantage over women."

This is a bloody important statement. There are far too many denying that there is any difference except testosterone levels. (And the IAAF are still only considering testosterone, not all the other points they're acknowledging.) Now they're on record that male puberty gives a performance advantage. They can't unsay it.

I don’t know caster’s diagnosis, but If she has external female genitalia and was raised female she may have had no clue she was intersex until she was tested after winning various events.

Indeed but she would know from that point onwards.

Indeed but she would know from that point onwards.*

Caster was tested when she made her breakthrough, age 18 in the middle of a major championship. She was allowed to continue competing so she had a choice? Continue running and take up the sponsorship and keep getting prize money or go back to her old life.

I know which one I would choose for me and my family.

Absolutely Nerr. Perfect example of vested interests. Completely understandable ones obviously.

I am not assuming anything about the results of such a test in the case of CS btw.

Indeed but she would know from that point onwards

What is she supposed to do? All he life she’s been female. She has been raised female, there has never been any question that she isn’t female, her own mother and family have treated her as female.

Imagine it’s you. Someone does a blood test and tells you you have a Y chromosome, and must now conform to male stereotype, use male bathrooms, can’t compete for female academic scholarships.

She hasn’t made a choice to be female. She just is. Should she compete with males? Stop competing? Give up what she’s trained so hard for?

She was born female.

Nobody knows what caster’s diagnosis is. The high testosterone may not confer an advantage if she is insensitive to androgens.

You are reacting rather strongly to my post really. All I said was she makes an informed choice from that point onwards. That's a factual statement.

Both yours and Nerr's responses imply you feel the results would be XY? I have made no assumptions whatsoever. My statement encompasses CS making an informed choice to continue to compete fairly knowing she has no Y chromosome.

Perhaps examine your assumptions about CS's chromosomal status, not mine.

I have no idea what her diagnosis is. Whatever the outcome of the medical tests age 18 she was allowed to continue to compete and she chose to continue to compete, whatever her advantage may be. That is all I am saying.

“A condition like AIS wouldn’t confer an advantage either as the body is insenstive to testosterone, so would have no effect even if levels are very high.”

Depends it it’s complete AIS or partial AIS.

“A condition like AIS wouldn’t confer an advantage either as the body is insenstive to testosterone, so would have no effect even if levels are very high.”

Incorrect. A Male with complete androgen insensitivity STILL has height and athletic advantages. Testosterone is a major, but not the only, contributor to Male physiological development.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1070097483408248835.html

Can we not speculate on athletes who may or may not have received chemical assistance to achieve results, so that this thread doesn't get zapped?

I also feel sorry for Caster. This situation is not of her making - I think she has been as gracious as possible whilst also reserving for herself the ability (right?) to compete and win prize money.

I also feel sorry for Lynsey Sharp and the other female athletes who have peaked at this time and basically have no chance of winning. Is it different to those who competed against, say, Michael Johnson? (I always felt sorry for Roger Black, destined to always pick up the silver and never the gold) I don't know. I feel uncomfortable with the IAAF saying that this condition is OK but this one isn't. Michael Phelps is a physical freak, with arms, hands and feet out of all proportion to his body, giving him immense natural talent in the pool. That's apparently OK, but presumably it wouldn't be OK if it were possible to take something that caused significant upper body and feet growth.

Of course, it's right that CS's medical information is kept private, but it does make it harder to reach a considered and informed view on what the IAAF is proposing

'Living as a man' is at best unclear and at worst pretty offensive. She's married to a woman and preferred a suit to a big white wedding dress. Men don't hold the monopoly over either of those things. The issue here is biology.

I too feel for Caster, and just as much for her competitors. Crappy situation. And excellent point about South Africa's racism accusations being fucking rich, given the structural racial discrimination that led to her not finding this out until so late in the day.

Semenya’s lawyer:

*"There are different regulations for DSD athletes and transgender athletes.

"Ms Semenya respects the rights and interests of transgender athletes around the world.

"Her case, however, is about the rights of women such as Ms Semenya, who are born as women, reared and socialised as women, who have been legally recognised as women for their entire lives, who have always competed in athletics as women, and who should be permitted to compete in the female category without discrimination."*

So I think it’s fair to say there is no “lives as a man” to any argument.

IAAF lawyer, if their law can’t be implemented:

"then DSD and transgender athletes will dominate the podiums and prize money in sport, and women with normal female testosterone levels will not have any chance to win".

Here's another thought. Suppose people with XY chromosomes and functional testes producing testosterone to which the body is wholly or partially sensitive are permitted to compete in women's sport but are required to lower their testosterone in order to be allowed to do so. Then suppose it turns out that this type of chemical castration for the length of an athletic career- say from age 16 or 17 to early or mid thirties- has deleterious long term effects eg reduced ligament strength, osteoporosis or worse. If their cruciates pop or their spine starts collapsing later in life and testosterone blockers are implicated, who is legally liable?

My instinct is that requiring athletes to artificially lower testosterone is morally and ethically wrong - it’s better to exclude them from women’s competition than it is to require them to risk their life-long health and wellbeing.

I had an awful time with side effects just from hormonal contraceptives (and haven’t looked back since I realised and quit the fuckers 15+ years ago) so I cannot accept that blocking the natural production of testosterone is safe or harmless. To do this solely for permission to compete in a sports category is morally just as wrong as doping women with testosterone in order to win, like in the bad old days.

Fucking with ones hormones is not without consequences - theoretically fine if adults make a truly informed consent choice with the support of medical professionals but not as a compulsory sports body directive.

Slight derail but aren't internal testes a risk for cancer in later life? I thought that was the case for boys/men with undescended testes. So shouldn't they be removed at some point anyway for health reasons?

My instinct is that requiring athletes to artificially lower testosterone is morally and ethically wrong - it’s better to exclude them from women’s competition than it is to require them to risk their life-long health and wellbeing.

I agree. Also, for atheletes from some countries, it wouldn’t be a free choice. The less palatable regimes often have a history of abuse of atheletes from a young age, with national glory placed well above their physical health. Requiring mandatory blockers would mean that atheletes from some countries would be forced into taking them.

Yes, internal testes are a cancer risk so should be removed. Can’t remember the exact increase in risk but it’s deemed significant.

I see the South African government are ramping up the race/apartheid card. It’s ridiculous to conflate the segregation of sport by sex with apartheid.