Female Namibian runners change events due to too high testosterone

[KevinBaconsJeans]

Just spotted this on my newsfeed and very confused. I've seen on another post that there is no maximum limit for women's natural testosterone. So does that mean that this BBC article is lying by omission about the sex of the runners to create a story that isn't true?

It talks about two Namibian runners who have had to switch to different events because they have high T...

www.bbc.com/sport/africa/58029941

Extract:
Her initial excitement at an Olympic qualification however was crushed when she was informed by World Athletics that she would not be able to compete in the 400m event at the Games due to high levels of testosterone.

"In the beginning I was very down, you can't come and tell me now I am not a woman. That is really frustrating and gets me on my nerves but there's nothing we can do about it at the moment," she told BBC Sport Africa...

"It is really unfair because you cannot expect everyone to be the same, everyone to have the same abilities, we are born with different abilities, we can't be the same it doesn't make sense."

Masilingi was only informed in July by World Athletics that her testosterone levels were beyond the allowed limit for female athletes wanting to run in distances from 400m to one mile, unless they medically lower their testosterone for a period of at least six months

Thanks nettie I found it now. I’m glad they at least highlighted it’s the same issue as with Caster Semenya, that at least might get people thinking

I watched the race on the highlights show. It didn't seem real the way mboma ran.

Then Claire Balding asked Michael Johnson to explain DSD and he did as best as I think he could get away with on the BBC

A black woman has just had a medal stolen from her. Black women's lives don't seem to matter so much.

The 200m final is at 2:05 here - www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p09pjw2c

@Manderleyagain

I haven't read this whole thread so apologies if this has been covered, but Michael Johnson took a moment to explain this a bit further on the BBC, when gabby logan would havevskipped over it. He explained why they are allowed in 200m but not 400m, giving the same explanation as the twitter thread by scienceofsport linked above. He said that these athletes have differences of sexual development (he wasn't explicit about exactly what that means in this case though), and the reason they can compete in some distances but not others was because at the court of arbitration for sport they could only prove an advantage in middle distances, not short or long.

He obviously does understand the situation (as he should) and thought it worth explaining on the beeb, which I thought was interesting.

What he said was dead interesting.

Also what he said about how quickly they were able to switch to another event that they had no technical experience of (which isn't as straightforward as non athletes would think) and were able to become that good at.

He also touched on how Caster was considering options about which other event to switch to.

Overall it gave the impression that the point about the fact DSD athletes were still being allowed to compete in certain events because no one could provide evidence they had an unfair advantage was merely because the burden of proof was set in a particular way - against women - in the first place. Had the burden of proof been set in reverse with DSD athletes having to prove they didn't have an unfair advantage things would be different. The way its set up is utterly nuts because women themselves can't have unnaturally high levels of testosterone in their blood, precisely because of the evidence that it gives an unfair advantage.

So we are left with this unsatisfactory double think where women can not have unnatural levels of testosterone because we know it gives an unfair advantage but we also have DSD athletes who are allowed to compete with testosterone levels higher than the max allowed for women because we cannot prove they have an unfair advantage.

It simply points to the data being collected on this simply not being up to scratch (probably due to sample sizes being so small and dsd athletes simply not yet entering elite sport) at this moment in time.
Yet there will be an assumption within athlete circles that with training DSD athletes will rise to the surface.

This does lead to the concern that DSD individuals will be targeted by scouts in the interim for nationalistic agendas. Whilst this might in the short term be wonderful for these DSD athletes, the danger is as the rise to the top and people start to question more, they will eventually be spat out by the system.

It does lead me thinking more and more that the only solution is DSD classes.

On top of this we have women missing out.

I also note there is not equivalent thinking for biological women going in male sports simply because they don't get to elite levels in the first place.

Only XY athletes benefit from the DSD debate in a similar fashion to the transgender debate. In this sense biological sex absolutely does matter and socialisation doesn't touch it. Whilst we've tried to prove women's bodies can match mens in all areas, when it comes to performing at the most elite levels all we find is that women's bodies are fundamentally different and should not be competing against male bodies - thats not to say we don't have massive strengths in our physical form that men don't (stamina and longevity being our particular strengths). On this note, i have the going feeling that feminism in not being completely honest about this has ultimately failed women in the long run.

The really awful thing about all this is that I find myself looking at women in other events and wondering if they too have DSDs

I know that 400, 800 and 1500 are now competed for by women.

But the high jump, long jump, sprints, team sports of various types, even rowing and cycling, how can we know that every competitor in the women's events is actually a woman any more?

It makes me really angry that instead of whole-heartedly admiring these athletes for their super-human strength, speed and ability, I find myself with a little niggle in the back of my brain wondering if they are, in fact, just not-very-good-men.

I think it highlights how the system is stacked against women and XX physiology.

Which is kind of why women's sport was set up in the first place.

It would be good if that could actually be acknowledged. I'm not holding my breathe in the climate of the high church of genderology.

Exactly RedToothbrush.

This is why the categories exist.🤷

Agree Turquoise my trust has gone. In fact I spent the 200m race observing that there were male bodied people in the race, instead of enjoying women competing. I had the same difficulty when CS raced.

I know that the IOC has been coming under increasing pressure and I wonder if the US has suddenly noticed that its medal count will be under threat (I bet the Jamaicans are already in there protesting). Wasn't a US athlete denied a Silver in that race and if so you can bet they'll be looking at fairness. It will of course highlight to the US that when theory meets reality (borrowed from Helen Joyce), the trans debate looks a lot more complicated than 'be kind' I'm not confusing DSD and trans but this debate will affect both

@Hulo I was staggered a couple of weeks ago when a US transman on BBC 24hr news talked about the 'masculinity' of black women athletes. He fudged but his implication was clear and he used the marvellous Serena Williams as some kind of example. I was really offended and what's more I just couldn't understand how the trans community thought that progressing their cause could be served by racism. Since when has Serena Williams been classed as masculine? Strong, fit, tall, imposing, brilliant player but anything to progress the trans cause, not even in their dreams. I noticed they didn't repeat, so someone else must have noticed.

@Clymene

I do not believe that they didn't know. That's the story that was spun about Semenya too.

But Semenya wore boys school uniform and wasn't allowed to do PE with girls at school.

It is a racist trope that these athletes come from remote villages where they don't understand that that not starting periods and instead going through male puberty where their genitalia changes to reassemble a more typically male presentation is perfectly normal.

Absolutely! Are we all supposed to go along with the ridiculously racist belief that these athletes were born in some Disney-esqu African village where there are no medical people, just some village Elder who decides a baby’s sex when they’re born? Some DSD conditions are inherited via a dominant gene, as is the case of CS, and many relatives in their family also have the same DSD. Sport at elite level is big business and open to exploitation. Coaches target certain areas where there is a high prevalence of this condition - ie XY androgen sensitivity. Here’s what the IAAF say: In a later press release published on 7th May (10), the IAAF made it crystal clear, “The DSD regulations only apply to individuals who are legally female (or intersex) and who have one of a certain number of specified DSDs, which mean that they have: male chromosomes (XY) not female chromosomes (XX); testes not ovaries; circulating testosterone in the male range (7.7 to 29.4 nmol/L) not the (much lower) female range (0.06 to 1.68 nmol/L); and the ability to make use of that testosterone circulating within their bodies (i.e., they are ‘androgen-sensitive’) medium.com/@Antonia_Lee/caster-semenya-ten-years-of-controversy-c50539f7e4e3

At least now these XY athletes have dropped down the distances there will be evidence to show their physiological advantages over women.

There will be evidence to show their physiological advantage over women

Well, one of these XY athletes managed to set a new world record for under 20’s in their new, shorter distance category. Would a biological woman who on short notice changed their distance manage that?

5 alpha reductase deficiency is inherited in an autosomal recessive pattern, not dominant.

I found this thread after watching the 200m race heats and thinking that the race didn't look right and the vague mentions of DSD on the BBC. It also makes me wonder about all of the previous years' competitions too.

The fact that so many of the women's world records in athletics have been held since the 1980's under a cloud of doping suspicion says a lot. Compared to the men's records which have subsequently been broken (despite the suspicion of doping being the same). It suggests that the advantage men get from taking anabolic steroids boosts their performance to the top-end of possible natural male ability. However, for women it pushes them beyond the top of what a women can hope to achieve. Almost like testosterone levels beyond the normal female range is advantageous

Would a biological woman who on short notice changed their distance manage that?

Exactly.

It’s a travesty that women have to lose out multiple times in order to evidence the obvious XY advantages.

twitter.com/Openly/status/1422537243231723526?s=20

@Ekofisk

Would a biological woman who on short notice changed their distance manage that?

Exactly.

It’s a travesty that women have to lose out multiple times in order to evidence the obvious XY advantages.

If the system wasn't stacked against women, the default would be a woman's body and for those with differences to prove their case to compete as being inclusive not for women to disprove that these competitors had an unfair advantage.

Even in women's sport, the default as male and the balance of having to produce evidence falls against the idea of female bodies as default.

That is the elephant in the room of those who make the rules. A room full of males who don't see the issue of not putting a female body as the default in women's sport.

If it was an issue that affected male sport then it would never have been allowed to get to this point.

@allmywhat

I hate the idea of excluding CAIS women from female sport. It’s totally unlike the other XY DSDs that involve male puberty -CAIS women will always be treated like women by everyone around them and they don’t have any reason whatsoever to think of themselves as male.

I can see that drawing a strict “no one with a Y chromosome” line might be necessary to protect female sports, especially since it seems like the borderline between CAIS and PAIS is not clear cut and we know that bad actors will leverage that to try to erase boundaries altogether. But it would be really crappy to have to do that.

I completely agree.

We mustn't let the bad faith of our opponents push us into taking unethical positions.

CAIS athletes clearly match the female category for sports much more than they do the male and shouldn't be pushed out of it for what seems like an ideological position.

The other one to look out for is Francine Niyonsaba (Burundi) who took silver in Rio over 800m. Because of the new DSD rules she moved up distances rather than down.

She initially qualified for the final of the 5000m but was later disqualified for a lane infringement. She’s on the start list for the 10,000m on Saturday. I don’t think she’ll challenge for a medal but it will be interesting to see how she fares.

felulageller

"A black woman has just had a medal stolen from her. Black women's lives don't seem to matter so much."

With all due respect, this has nothing to do with race, except in so far as ALL the athletes with the 46 XY DSD have been black Africans. The women being beaten by Semenya were from all races.

I'm not sure personally that DSD XY46 people who have been through male puberty and produce male level testosterone should be racing against natal women.

I get the sympathy. I do. But a male body against a female body remains unfair.

Absolutely! Are we all supposed to go along with the ridiculously racist belief that these athletes were born in some Disney-esqu African village where there are no medical people, just some village Elder who decides a baby’s sex when they’re born?
Some DSD conditions are inherited via a dominant gene, as is the case of CS, and many relatives in their family also have the same DSD. Sport at elite level is big business and open to exploitation. Coaches target certain areas where there is a high prevalence of this condition - ie XY androgen sensitivity.

A lot of children in africa are born in situations with no medically qualified people. It is not 'disney-eque'; it is the unfortunate reality of many many women. If a child from a family with a known high level of this DSD was born in a well equipped hospital then it is likely further checks would be carried out before sex ia registered.

A condition that renders you infertile cannot be passed on through a dominant gene.

CAIS athletes clearly match the female category for sports much more than they do the male and shouldn't be pushed out of it for what seems like an ideological position.

There would need to be good faith research in distinguishing CAIS and PAIS and it would probably result in a different problematic threshold.

It's unfortunate that some will choose to see this as an ideological position but these are the edge cases that are being used to erode boundaries.

Just to put this performance into some kind of perspective, I looked into the other U20 women's world records.
Allyson Felix held the previous record at 22.18s, compared to Mboma's 21.81s.

trackandfieldnews.com/records/womens-world-junior-records/