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

@Photinia

Can I ask a possibly naïve question?

Would it be unreasonable to describe these runners as biologically male people with a congenital abnormality / difference in their external genitalia (caused by a specific DSD), which caused them to be assigned female at birth?

Is that an incorrect use of the term "congenital abnormality" and/or in other ways offensive to those living with DSDs?

I can't speak for the specific classes in your post (runners; people with VSD).

I have a congenital abnormality. Context would rule my visceral response to how it is introduced into a conversation or discussion. If it were from people enquiring about it in bad faith or have a history of mocking it, I would find this beyond tiresome and even offensive.

If a clinician asked me about it and its wider manifestations, I'd respond as if this were a good faith interaction. I might still find parts of it distressing, and it it were a clumsy clinician who is caught up in ego defence for some degree of ignorance, I might also find that tiresome and a little frustrating but I'd see it as something that I need to get through.

What we will get to is white genetically perfect athletes only

You are just taking a racist trope and building on it. That might get you likes on twitter, but it doesn’t count as argument here.

@Maggiethecat and @Jamdown133 apologies for drawing you in to this discussion if it's not one you want to join but I didnt want to derail your own thread which I was enjoying.

Mbomba was assigned female at birth therefore legally female but went through male puberty and is XY and therefore has male circulating testosterone. The reason for the restrictions at certain distances and not others is because of the fact that the advantage has been proven by already having 46XY athletes compete and win in these events in the womens competition.

Thanks for that, EA. Very powerful to hear your direct experience.

The spirit in which I'm asking is that this is sort of where my understanding (of congenital abnormalities and V/DSDs and athletics) is, and I'm wondering whether any of that is either just plain wrong, or not a helpful way to think about it.

I do feel very sorry for the athletes caught up in this - those with DSDs, the athletes who are pushed down/out of the medals as a result and transgender athletes.

I believe that all should be allowed to compete and would achieve this by using categories, just like the way paralympians are put into categories so that competition is as fair as possible.

Christine Mboma and Beatrice Masilinigi are dedicated athletes who deserve to be at the olympics. However, they should not be competing in women's events IMHO (or men's). There should be proper categorisation so that they can compete against physically similar athletes. There are a lot of intersex people and a lot of transgender people and there should be proper provision for them to compete.

And to add, I do think it's terrible that these athletes have been told they can compete if they surgically or pharmaceutically reduce their testosterone levels. That is not good for them - their bodies are natural as they are and I don't think they should be advised to take medication/have surgery. They should have a category they can compete in as they are.

Is there any evidence these athletes are at a sporting disadvantage versus non-DSD males? If so, how does it arise? What's the mechanism?

Given that they're actually well within normal male distribution, why can't we conclude they're just non-elite males?

Maybe there is a disadvantage, but at what level? Compared to other conditions, like, say, diabetes?

The case for a paralympic category is a strong one.

DSD covers a range of conditions, and in some cases surgery or medication is a desired or necessay course of action, such as the removal of internal testes responsible for the high T levels.

They should have a category they can compete in as they are.

Is the " men's" category not really just an open category? Is it not just the female category which is protected?

There is no disadvantage. There’s nothing medically or biologically that precludes these males from competing with other males. The only thing is the incorrect paperwork of their birth certificate.

The case for a paralympic category is a strong one.

I remain unconvinced. Certainly possible, but I've not seen a detailed argument. I don't even know if these athletes have any disadvantage. Maybe other DSDs (who aren't olympic contenders) do. And you need to balance these conditions versus all the other possible Paralympic classifications, in terms of population it would include, what the disadvantage is, and how easy it is to draw the lines. And how many "DSD" categories might you need?

Is the " men's" category not really just an open category? Is it not just the female category which is protected?

Varies from sport to sport, often without any deep reasoning, it seems, as the net effect is the same either way. In integrated male+female events like the Olympics, it probably really is "men's", because they will have written up the rules symmetrically by default.

In standalone "male-only" things like, say, American NBA basketball, it's actually open, because they just haven't thought about women at all.

@aiwblam

And to add, I do think it's terrible that these athletes have been told they can compete if they surgically or pharmaceutically reduce their testosterone levels. That is not good for them - their bodies are natural as they are and I don't think they should be advised to take medication/have surgery. They should have a category they can compete in as they are.

You mean men’s events?

Unfortunately it is very hard to become an elite athlete in men’s events , which is why there is such a push for DSD athletes to be accepted in women’s events where their chances are higher.

I don’t believe DSD athletes are only told of their DSD status as they board the plane to fly to international competitions .They will have been told long before, because it will have been very clear for some years that there were anomalies in their physical development. I understand that there will be pressure put on them by their national governing bodies to compete in women’s events, and that is grossly unfair as they are often very young and the rewards for athletic success can be huge. But ultimately they have , for whatever reason, made a decision and chosen to compete in women’s events knowing that they will be likely be faced with questions, possible abuse and discrimination. Caster Semanya ‘s history is common knowledge after all. They could have chosen to retire from elite sports completely rather than usurp women’s sports, they didn’t make that choice.

Choosing to discontinue an athletic career is after all the same decision many young promising athletes all over the world make because of injury , family circumstances or because they realise they are not good enough. To see these DSD athletes as victims is to deny that they have autonomy to make decisions about their careers.

No degree of dedication is sufficient to gain anyone an Olympic place, in any category.

They could have chosen to retire from elite sports completely rather than usurp women’s sports, they didn’t make that choice.

Other athletes with similar conditions did make that choice, to their credit.

Here's the example of Erik Schinegger.

Although back then, obviously, someone in that position was not surrounded by a bunch of people who would enable them to do the unethical thing.

The question with Semenya is who is the Colenel Parker pulling the strings?

www.world.rugby/the-game/player-welfare/guidelines/transgender

If anyone, I mean anyone, says they don't have the evidence, they need only look at the full report done by World Rugby (can't bring to mind the fabulous guy who did not back down). World Rugby resisted all the be kind pile ons and stuck by the report. The IOC just didn't want to find out. They want it to happen in small steps and don't care that in the meantime many women miss out.

The IOC has always had that whiff of corruption about it, and we can therefore see clearly that they could have done something about this some years ago and never did. The public furore was just a matter of time and now they know they cannot pretend. I look forward to what they are going to fudge after the games

Can I ask a possibly naïve question?

So, I have a 46xy DSD condition, this is an interesting thread with a lot of facts but also a lot of naive misunderstandings about the diverse situations discussed. The repeated charges of cheating in this thread are... naive.

I personally don't know what is the correct solution for inclusion. I have known a swimmer with 46xy DSD and I remember her saying she was encouraged to train for olympics but she just thought it was a can of worms that she didn't feel like opening so she gave up her dreams.

Many of us have a completely female body, in shape (waist, shoulders, limbs, face) as well as genitals, by the time we are diagnosed (in my case at age 16) and have no "gender dysphoria" and we have our life mapped out as women.

Many women with DSD conditions are lied to: they often have gonadectomy at childhood and are told they had cancer - fortunately this practice is being discontinued these days due to patient group activism. I've met women in their 50's who were trying to rebuild their understanding of their own bodies, by following up cryptic medical notes.

I think the olympic committee has a hard job finding a good way forward. I hope they have input from ethical experts rather than ideological fanatics in making their decisions. It seems to me that the evolving regulations for DSD are more scientific than those for trans women - but I am of course likely to be biased.

Thank you for sharing @orkid. Yes, it is complex and yes, the treatment of people with DSD has been horrific and should be better. I am glad to hear that things are changing in the medical world.

I believe that the Court of Arbitration made some wise comments and considerations during it's assessment of Caster Semenya's case. The regulations refer to athletes with 46 XY DSD who have a natural testosterone level of above 5 nmol/L, and who experience a “material androgenizing effect” from that enhanced testosterone level, I understand that this does not apply to all 46XY DSD conditions.

What is baffling is why the limit was set so far above the female range and why it did not apply to all events.

Every year in every sport there are people who have trained their whole lives who cannot continue, whether through injury, losing funding or just because they cannot compete at the next level up. It can be utterly heartbreaking for that individual and is frequently as much to do with luck as hard work and dedication.

People saying how unfair it would be to exclude XY athletes from women's competitions because they "never knew" - how is it any different to what all those other individuals go through each year?

@orkid

Can I ask a possibly naïve question?

So, I have a 46xy DSD condition, this is an interesting thread with a lot of facts but also a lot of naive misunderstandings about the diverse situations discussed. The repeated charges of cheating in this thread are... naive.

I personally don't know what is the correct solution for inclusion. I have known a swimmer with 46xy DSD and I remember her saying she was encouraged to train for olympics but she just thought it was a can of worms that she didn't feel like opening so she gave up her dreams.

Many of us have a completely female body, in shape (waist, shoulders, limbs, face) as well as genitals, by the time we are diagnosed (in my case at age 16) and have no "gender dysphoria" and we have our life mapped out as women.

Many women with DSD conditions are lied to: they often have gonadectomy at childhood and are told they had cancer - fortunately this practice is being discontinued these days due to patient group activism. I've met women in their 50's who were trying to rebuild their understanding of their own bodies, by following up cryptic medical notes.

I think the olympic committee has a hard job finding a good way forward. I hope they have input from ethical experts rather than ideological fanatics in making their decisions. It seems to me that the evolving regulations for DSD are more scientific than those for trans women - but I am of course likely to be biased.

While I respect your personal experience, you’re wrong to say people here are naive. The World Athletics ruling did involve some of the world’s foremost sports scientists and ethics experts. The ruling specifically refers to people 46XY DSDs with testes still present and virilisation having taken place. For example CAIS is not included in this ruling. We therefore know these athletes have a male body shape, testes, and all the other benefits of male puberty.

As well as us knowing this and World Athletics knowing this, the Namibian authorities must also know this, yet despite this they are loudly and angrily proclaiming these athletes are 46XX. This a blatant lie. It’s no different to when a doping sample is returned positive and those around the athlete claim it’s contamination, sample error, etc. Somebody is determined to cheat, that’s for sure, even if it’s not the athletes themselves.

No one has any knowledge of how or when these athletes discovered they were male, how they coped, how distressing it may have been, or whether they have always known and it’s been deliberate. The latter is unlikely but not impossible. Either way as difficult the lives of 46XY people may be in relation to diagnosis, their feelings do not and should not get to override the feelings of Gabby Thomas and Shelley-Ann Fraser-Price who have trained their entire lives for this moment only to be denied medals by Mboma who took up the 200m last week.

Choosing to discontinue an athletic career is after all the same decision many young promising athletes all over the world make because of injury , family circumstances or because they realise they are not good enough. To see these DSD athletes as victims is to deny that they have autonomy to make decisions about their careers

This. Most of us are not elite athletes. It’s tolerable.

Moving post, orkid. Thank you for sharing. For me, it really highlights that most people with 46XY conditions will make decisions about how to lead their lives in private.

Orkid's post included the example of a swimmer who chose not to try and become an elite athlete. However, I do think it is possible to overstate the degree of autonomy for people with this condition who have the potential to become elite international athletes in a low income country. Competing in women's competitions means your family has much more financial security, you have the opportunity to obtain sponsorship and possibly even to move to another country should you wish. You are also told that winning will bring status and recognition to your country. This last point came out clearly in the post race interview with Christine Mboma.

Orkid's point about ethics is really important. The best discussions about this situation have recognised the competing arguments between fairness and inclusion. I also read that 46XY conditions are more common in Sub Saharan Africa so this can add an ethnic dimension to the debate. To add to these complexities, trans advocates have used people with intersex conditions to advance their own arguments.

It doesn't help that scientific literacy among the general public is generally low. I'm including myself in this. There are people on this board on this and similar threads with who clearly have vast amounts of specialist knowledge.

I do know a bit about International politics and it seems to me that we have to recognise that sports and politics are closely intertwined in all countries. I think Fair Play for Women do recognise this but the wider politics and the existence of so many interest groups makes their task harder.

However, I do think it is possible to overstate the degree of autonomy for people with this condition who have the potential to become elite international athletes in a low income country. Competing in women's competitions means your family has much more financial security, you have the opportunity to obtain sponsorship and possibly even to move to another country should you wish. You are also told that winning will bring status and recognition to your country. This last point came out clearly in the post race interview with Christine Mboma.

Don't think this can be overstated. Also , not just developing countries but authoritarian countries which might put national status on the World stage before any consideration of the health and well being of their athletes. Anyone remember East Germany? Want to get they would have exploited this?

A certain number of people will always be tempted into doing the wrong thing. It's effectively entrapment.

Post 2001, the FBI were involved in creating a whole bunch of bombing plots. They trawled Muslim communities trying to get people to take part in their schemes. And frequently they'd have to work harder and harder to try to get people to keep going along, including significant financial inducements.

Certainly, those who agreed to go along are at fault. But it's also clear from case reports that there's no way that the people convicted would have been any threat to anyone without the FBI there to direct them.

The FBI had a quota - they were going to find someone Muslim to take part in these plots, no matter what. So you end up convicting the however many weakest-willed members of the target population for something that's entirely the authorities' own design.

So what we see hear is the weakest-willed members of the 46XY DSD class, targetted by authorities, tempted into doing this thing that deep down they may realise they shouldn't, but offered so much to do it.

There's no real point attacking the individuals caught up in it. There would have been many who refused, you're just seeing the few who didn't manage to refuse. They were always going to find someone desperate enough.

You have to stop the people putting them in this position - directly their countries' sporting authorities, and at second remove the international sports bodies who are not stopping them.

At least those involved here have far less to lose than the women targetted by the East Germans. Their lives were destroyed by the drugs they were given.

I also read that 46XY conditions are more common in Sub Saharan Africa

For anyone who hasn't read about this, this is a reasonable overview (pdf is available as a free download). NB for the age of presentation or when somebody consulted a healthcare system about the children:

*Overall the median age of presentation was 10 months (IQR: 1 month–4.5 years). There was a significant relationship (p