The comment in full:
Morag says:
1st May 2019 at 10:35 pm
I don’t really agree with some of this. I think the essential point that’s being missed is that the CAS has in effect determined Semenya to be biologically male, on the grounds that she has both a functional SRY gene and significant androgen response. I find myself in agreement with this, having independently come to the same conclusion in recent weeks.
How do we define the binary of sex in the face of the constant “but teh intersex!” whine from the TRA lobby? They’re right that a simply XY/XX split is insufficiently discriminative in that it throws up some very clear misallocations. We need a better measure.
In my opinion basing this on the presence or absence of a functioning SRY gene and functioning androgen receptors is the best approach. No SRY gene, definitely female. SRY gene but no functioning androgen receptors, also female (CAIS) – although it appears that these women have a marginal edge in competition, possibly due to other effects of the Y chromosome. Functioning SRY gene and significant androgen response, male.
This seems to be the thinking of the IAAF. Caster Semenya has a Y chromosome and nobody has suggested there is no SRY gene there. She also has significant androgen responsiveness – you only have to look at her to see that, and the fact that her performance allegedly drops significantly if she lowers her testosterone concentration artificially proves it. So by that metric, even though socially and legally she’s a woman, for the purposes of competition rules she is in fact biologically male.
It’s true that a virilised XX woman with excess adrenal (or ovarian) testosterone production would be in much the same position practically speaking. The CAS seems to have confirmed that such a woman would not be required to lower her testosterone, because she is a woman. But Semenya is not in that category. It’s very hard on her, because she didn’t choose to be put in this position, but the ruling is in my opinion entirely logical and entirely fair.
In effect, in this particular context, Semenya, a biological male, is being given the same exemptions as other biological males who want to compete in women’s events. She is reaping the advantage of the inclusion of transwomen in women’s sports, and being allowed to compete as a transwoman.
The case is full of paradoxes. In trans-speak Semenya would be considered to be “cis”, because her gender identity matches the identity she was “asssigned at birth”. But in fact both of these identities are discordant with the actual biological sex of her body. You might say she is an “afab transwoman”!
It’s obvious she has always been sensitive about this. She gets very upset if anyone accuses her of being a man. But she and her advisors must have known she was XY with what appears to be PAIS. Her actual genotype has been kept secret for many years. Surely it would have been better for her if this case had never been brought. If she’d just accepted the ruling and reduced her testosterone she could have continued to keep her genotype secret. Now, however, her XY genotype is public knowledge, and the unkind people who called her a man may consider themselves vindicated.
I sadly fear the SA athletics authorities were far too keen to have the star runner on their team and didn’t want her pulled back by having to lower her testosterone. They pulled the “racist” card and the “discrimination” card and tried to browbeat the CAS. It didn’t work, and the principle victim of all this is poor Caster Semenya, who must be suffering horribly at present.
But the victory has been for the biological sex essentialists. Semenya is in the category of biological male and has to compete under the rules that govern biological males in women’s sports. A biological female with a similar endocrinological advantage will not be penalised because she is a bona fide female. I’m very encouraged by this.