Mboma breaks more records

[PennineSpring]

sports.yahoo.com/mboma-eyes-diamond-league-winning-173158774.html

After reading Carole Hooven’s excellent book Testosterone, I have a greater understanding into the DSD these two athletes have. The science is clear, they are biological males with a DSD so what are World Athletics going to do now? Ignore them? Keep their heads in the sand whilst women’s track records get obliterated?

Bullsh*t.

Unless you're publicly disagreeing with everyone who has ever parroted the line, "Sex is not assigned at birth; it is observed". Are you?

I think there needs to be a review looking at the total picture of biological advantages and disadvantages between sexes and sports on a case by case basis.
We know that some sports can be fairly mixed sex, but other can never be.
Athletics is surely in the latter group.

These athletes are male. The fact their sex wasn’t correctly identified as being male at birth is a matter for those who were present and made a mistake.

Women’s sport is for females. Not males.

It’s good, actually. The only reason these athletes with XY chromosomes and male levels of testosterone aren’t subject to the testosterone lowering rules was that it couldn’t be proved that in the 100m, 200m and 1500 being biologically male and androgen sensitive was advantageous.

These young athletes, bursting into the scene and winning medals will put pressure on the IAAF.

ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/728/cpsprodpb/C38E/production/_120026005_gettyimages-1234744086.jpg

From the BBC article.

Beatrice Masilingi, coming second in the 100m.

The more that images like that are published, the more likely it is that the “women with naturally high testosterone” trope is questioned, and rightly so.

Well who are you going to believe, your eyes or the IOC?

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Bullsh*t.

Unless you're publicly disagreeing with everyone who has ever parroted the line, "Sex is not assigned at birth; it is observed". Are you?

The "line" has ALWAYS been that sex is observed at birth and the term "assigned at birth" was only ever legitimate/accurate (and in fact coined by) the process that happened in hospitals with the tiny proportion of people born with an intersex condition and ambiguous genetalia.

Though every intersex condition can be ascribed to a disorder of development of either male or female development, sometimes arbitarily (with the best intentions) the medics thought it would be easiest for them to live as the other sex and made that call. Not always correctly for the individual.

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Bullsh*t.

Unless you're publicly disagreeing with everyone who has ever parroted the line, "Sex is not assigned at birth; it is observed". Are you?

For 99% of people, sex is clearly observable following birth, or even on ultrasound scans beforehand. A tiny number of people have DSDs where their sex is not immediately apparent. In developed countries further tests (chromosomal and ultrasound scans) establish beyond doubt the infant's sex. Other countries may not have the expertise to recognise this.

Either way, someone with normal male genitalia (Laurel Hubbard for example) was most definitely observed, not assigned. Frankly your use of people with DSDs in this way is offensive.

The sports governing bodies need to sort themselves out. Anyone who has testes and is sensitive to testosterone is male and shouldn't be in women's sport, and nor should anyone who went through male puberty.

Yes, v unfair biological advantages: they shouldn’t be competing in the women’s category.

@GrimDamnFanjo

I think there needs to be a review looking at the total picture of biological advantages and disadvantages between sexes and sports on a case by case basis. We know that some sports can be fairly mixed sex, but other can never be. Athletics is surely in the latter group.

Very, very few sports can be mixed sex. Equestrian sports are the only Olympic ones that are mixed sex - even there men dominate but that’s likely for sociological reasons. Even in sports like shooting where the physical advantage of men is less obvious, women cannot compete fairly and thus have a separate category. I believe ultra- long distance running is another one where women sometimes outperform men, but these sports are very very rare.

This cannot go on. Women's athletics will be finished.

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Bullsh*t.

Unless you're publicly disagreeing with everyone who has ever parroted the line, "Sex is not assigned at birth; it is observed". Are you?

I suggest you read Carole Hooven’s book. It’s quite clear how someone can have feminised genitals at birth yet ho onto to have a full male puberty. Google Guevedoces.

I'm not sure a separate review for each sport is necessary. We know the advantages for males over females in sport, we know those advantages aren't completely removed by lowering testosterone (they are hardly reduced at all). Sports that are currently mixed sex and fair like equestrian sports can stay mixed sex, all other sports should be segregated by sex, with no concessions allowing males into female categories. If proof is found in the future of a fair and safe way for males to be in female categories then the rules can be reassessed.

We have increasing amounts of research showing female sports should be female only. The fact that the sports governing bodies (except World Rugby) are dragging their heels and trying to claim 'its complicated' shows they are more interested in prioritising male feelings that can never be objectively verified above proven fairness and safety concerns for females.

@nolongersurprised

ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/728/cpsprodpb/C38E/production/_120026005_gettyimages-1234744086.jpg

From the BBC article.

Beatrice Masilingi, coming second in the 100m.

The more that images like that are published, the more likely it is that the “women with naturally high testosterone” trope is questioned, and rightly so.

That photograph says it all.

The longer I live, the more it saddens me just how easily our species is corrupted by the temptations of winning or power or money. I don’t mean the athletes here. It seems to be clear that there are certain trainers who spotted this loophole, and even though they must know it’s not sporting or fair, they went out and actively searched for athletes with these conditions.

I have no idea whether the athletes themselves knew in advance what they were being used for. If not, what a horrible way to find out, in the glare of public attention and suspicion.

So much of this, whether in sport or in other areas, comes down to greed: to taking things that you know full well you are not entitled to take. It’s a really sad reflection on human nature.

The recruitment of athletes with DSD is today's version of doping, only this time it appears to be supported by sporting bodies, hiding under the name of inclusivity.

There already is a long term study into the biological advantage of males over females. It is called the world records.

There really doesn't need to be much more specific research done at all. There is so bloody much sport science on male / female differences already out there. It's on of the easiest topics for every undergrad's dissemination and commercial interests pay for a lot too.

All of this 'we don't know' bollocks is a sop, basically a white lie, told to postpone the inevitable.

The IOC and ever other sport governing body is fully aware.