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

[Vermeil]

Human Roghts Watch have a go at World Athletics about sex testing

‘ “Identifying athletes through observation and suspicion amounts to a policing of women’s bodies based on arbitrary definitions of femininity and racial stereotypes,” said Agnes Odhiambo, senior women’s rights researcher at HRW.’

This seems to just keep going round and round. There doesn’t seem to be any easy answers when it comes to people with intersex conditions in women’s sport, but personally I don’t think waving through those who have, for instance, androgen Insensitivity which would have otherwise made them male should be competing. It’s tough, but as it only seems to be woman’s sports affected then that’s the way it is. Not only that, but there’s an ugly feeling of unspoken background agenda, too. No doubt there’s a report imminent that’s basically not much more than ‘be kind’....

www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/dec/04/world-athletics-accused-over-abusive-sex-testing-of-athletes-from-global-south

Attaching the relevant text as a photo for lurkers.

This paragraph doesn’t support your argument that Tucker has withdrawn his support for Caster to run in women’s events so I would love to see evidence of this.

I would say that the paragraph in the CAS Doc is broadly inline with what tucker says in the podcast but he does view Caster as an XY female without the Full advantages conferred by testosterone. He is at great pains to explain that it’s about the level of T combined with an individuals ability to use it.

Again, I’m paraphrasing what I’ve heard from him, so if you aren’t convinced then I’d refer you to what he says on the pod.

You’ve linked the old podcast. This is the most recent:

play.acast.com/s/realscienceofsport/thecaseofcaster-whyprincipletrumpedbadevidence-herfuture-whatitmeansforthefutureofwomenssport?fbclid=IwAR09_4i3uulLT9tdfJlC7YBjvV3AFDX04O4jvBcRwRlv-KhrzV3Mh2TmchE

This paragraph doesn’t support your argument that Tucker has withdrawn his support for Caster to run in women’s events so I would love to see evidence of this.

I never said it did. I said that was the quickest way to see that Semenya has 5-ARD.

Can you point out where in the old podcast Tucker said Semenya has AIS? It’s 1 hour 20 min.

But you should listen to the more recent podcast rather than one from last year.

The first one has the most detailed explanation of casters position. I think all four about DSD and trans are essential listening.

Caster Semenya has male lung capacity, male VO2Max, male cardiac output, male skeletal structure, male pelvic angles, no uterus, has never had a period, and has been through male puberty with the court agreed has androgenisation benefits of testosterone.

And despite all those benefits, the article in the OP is arguing it is wrong to try and find out people like Semenya are competing in female sport.

Caster Semenya has male lung capacity, male VO2Max, male cardiac output, male skeletal structure, male pelvic angles, no uterus, has never had a period, and has been through male puberty with the court agreed has androgenisation benefits of testosterone.

And when Caster’s male levels of testosterone, made from internal testes, are suppressed Caster loses against women, so Caster has fought for the “right” to “run free”. Caster has benefited from a male puberty and is androgen sensitive.

Ross Tucker in the latest podcast:

“I’m a big believer in a firm line separating biological male and female in principle I think the policy is correct I just don’t know they’ve figured out a way to handle it.”

He agrees with the decision and the policy but is critical of the IAAF/WA’s handling of it and the implementation of it.

That’s not remotely my understanding of Casters position from Ross Tucker. Do you have a link for your comments about her physiology?
It’s so interesting to me having heard him talk on this to then be presented with the complete opposite position. I’m not saying you are wrong- it’s just within even this debate getting a clear sense of ‘the truth’ appears to be endlessly contradictory.

That’s not remotely my understanding of Casters position from Ross Tucker.

Do you mean apart from him speaking those exact words in the latest podcast?

Do you have a link for your comments about her physiology?

What do you mean? It’s clear Semenya has 5-ARD, which only affects males and leads to failure of development on external genitalia. Everything else is male. Look up 5 alpha reductase deficiency.

It’s so interesting to me having heard him talk on this to then be presented with the complete opposite position. I’m not saying you are wrong- it’s just within even this debate getting a clear sense of ‘the truth’ appears to be endlessly contradictory.

You haven’t demonstrated where Tucker says Semenya has androgen insensitivity syndrome. It’s not remotely contradictory. Semenya’s diagnosis of 5-ARD is clear from the ruling, basic understanding of that condition tells you the rest, and the Court of Arbitration for Sport agreed that Semenya has always had the male advantage of testosterone. There’s nothing contradictory at all.

Women and girls deserve their sport protected from the participation of males. Simple.

Sorry, crossed wires-
My post about that not being tuckers position was in response to this:
‘Caster Semenya has male lung capacity, male VO2Max, male cardiac output, male skeletal structure, male pelvic angles, no uterus, has never had a period, and has been through male puberty with the court agreed has androgenisation benefits of testosterone‘

Tucker says at multiple points that the evidence does NOT support Casters ban. He gives all the very complex reasons why he thinks that. He expresses deep disappointment at the ruling and says he thinks they got it wrong, and that principle had trumped evidence.

He also says that before being asked to review casters case he felt she shouldn’t run. He then reviewed the evidence and joined her team.
He talks about this for four hours and at no point does he say caster has the advantages that you’ve listed. I’d love to read your source for those assertions. Just to confirm they are correct. If they are then I’d say you are right and Tucker is wrong.

Also, Why does he call caster she at all points?

Personally, I can see why CAS went the way they did, but I find it weird seeing Tucker sited here as holding different opinions than they ones he has espoused at length.

You seem very well informed from other sources, I’m literally just coming at this from having listened to him state his position at length.

He talks about this for four hours and at no point does he say caster has the advantages that you’ve listed. I’d love to read your source for those assertions. Just to confirm they are correct.

Go back to basics. Caster is XY, not a single cell of caster’s is female. Hence, no uterus, no periods, no oestrogen. The only reason Caster was assumed to be female was due to lack of development of external genitalia, due to an enzyme defect. Underdevelopment of a penis does not make someone a female.

From puberty onward Caster makes testosterone from internal testes AND is sensitive to this (as per the CAIS ruling, otherwise there’d be no need for testosterone suppression). Male puberty = skeletal and cardiovascular advantages.

You’re taking it from the first podcast. Listen to the second instead.

He didn’t support the ban based on flaws of the (then) IAAF’s methodology, not because he doesn’t think there is male advantage.

He calls Semenya “she” because as a fellow South African he likes and respects Semenya I imagine. It’s a much more emotive topic in South Africa.

I’d love to read your source for those assertions. Just to confirm they are correct. If they are then I’d say you are right and Tucker is wrong.

My source for saying Semenya has 5 alpha reductase deficiency is the CAS ruling that I linked where it is clear. My source for saying Semenya has all the other physiological advantages is the medical knowledge of what 5 alpha reductase deficiency is. All of what I said is 100% true.

At no point does Tucker argue that Semenya does not have these other advantages because it wasn’t part of the case, which in my opinion was mistake. Everything was hung on testosterone and its effects.

Tucker said, in the podcast just recently he agrees with the policy. I quoted him verbatim. He just doesn’t agree with the methodology.

What exactly do you think, based on your understanding and your understanding of listening to Tucker, qualifies Semenya to race against females?

And coming back to the OP, it’s imperative that female sport is protected and if that means all female athletes have to undergo a test to see their karyotype so be it.

A simpler way would be a screening question of “Do you have or have you had a period(s)?”

This would not only pick up males, who will have never had a period, like Semenya, but it will also identify women whose bodies aren’t in a healthy state from overtraining plus some other conditions that should be attended to. The only downside to this would be the requirement for honesty in the answer, and given my general skepticism about some athletes’ and some countries’ ability to be honest when it comes to elite sport, I think the genetic testing is necessary.

Women’s and girls’ sport is under such attack currently that it seems stringent protections are the only way.

And I do not see how HRW are going to convince me otherwise by telling the sob stories of three biological males.

Actual sex testing in sports by medical means was introduced in 1966, but then stopped in 1991 due to "ethical reasons", which is how we have the ridiculous situation where male bodied athletes are allowed to compete against women. This is why I believe the semenya case was hushed up for so long. As for the allegation that sex testing is humiliating for women, it isn't. It is a simple blood test, using PCR to determine the chromosomes.

academic.oup.com/bmb/article-abstract/48/3/683/297802?redirectedFrom=PDF

thestudentlawyer.com/2019/09/17/sex-testing-in-athletics-the-key-cases/

In my opinion CAS did not go far enough, Caster Semenya should not be competing in women's sport.

www.theguardian.com/sport/video/2019/may/01/iaaf-rules-necessary-to-preserve-integrity-of-female-athletics-says-cas-on-caster-semenya-video

The arrogance is astounding and very revealing.

A PP has said these two topics (trans and DSD) should not be conflated but there is an overlap ethically.

I urge any of you to listen to Tuckers podcast, they’re very accessible to anyone interested in sport and science.
In his second podcast there is a definite shift in tone. He doesn’t disagree with the World Athletic decision as he agrees they are trying to keep Women’s sport fair, however he is very critical of the research done by World Athletics to show that XY athletes with DSD have an advantage. They could only prove it in the events they have banned CS from which is why she is able to compete at shorter and longer events than the 800m.

I agree with his position which is CAS ruled that putting fairness above everything is a acceptable matter of principle for sport. They asked WA to go away and produce the science to back that up. And that where WA fell down. Luckily for them, despite the shonky research, CAS upheld the original decision.

Great thread, thanks all. If anything it demonstrates why the trans movement always talks about DSDs. Because it creates a smokescreen around the fact that in almost every, and perhaps every, case of a transwoman wanting to compete as a woman there is no ambiguity about their biological sex. It's a trap for us. Whatever the rules about the many different DSDs that exist - and they are not all the same as explained so well above by @NotBadConsidering - the issue we have is males declaring a female inner essence.