Should there be a DSD category at the Paralympics?

[GerbilsAllTheWayDown]

I think it would be a great idea to have a DSD category, but I lack the knowledge to really assess whether it would be a good idea and what the merits and pitfalls might be. What do the wise women of FWR think?

A couple of days ago I would have said yes if the DSD actually amounted to a disability. Now, I would say no.

If you have a DSD which limits your athletic prowess that's just bad luck. We don't have special categories for asthmatics, or people with heart problems. It's neither practical nor justifiable for the tiny number of men involved.

Sorry, I just saw your post.

So you believe that at no stage, even if an advantage has been proven, that athletes with CAIS should be excluded from the female sports category?

Good to know. I disagree and I think you are relying a great deal on emotional reasoning to try to convince others on this thread.

And we are now in a situation where people who are 'legally female' can be male.

You can argue that it is a human rights abuse. However, taking all emotion out of your arguments, if an advantage is proven, it can be argued that impinges on female athletes human rights to have their opportunity of fair and safe competition.

The potential harm to a huge amount of women doesn't seem to concern you. I'm more interested in the huge number than a few.

Size of the group does not matter.

Besides, if what you have argued is true, and there is no reliable test except that a person is XY chromatically and has no ovaries but is producing testosterone at a male level, but they don't process it, then there is a group of male athletes who fit that diagnosis.

You argued that the 7 athletes was a false statistic. If it is impossible to diagnose CAIS accurately, then surely it is likely that they will fit into a group with those other athletes and therefore, that 'group' should be excluded.

So, therefore we cycle around to there was 7 athletes in 1996 that tested for a DSD that closely resembled CAIS or was CAIS. Whether you believe it is tiny or not, the group should not be included if they are found to have an advantage.

Yeah, sorry but I'm with Newgreenduck.

If those with cais are as physically weak as you claim then the likelihood of them being competitive sports players is slim.

If there were 7 competitors with cais eliminated as stated in the study quoted, that implies that those with cais are NOT as weak and feeble as previously stated.

And, as I've repeatedly stated, there are several other dsd conditions that have put XY competitors into XX competitions. I've no idea why you refuse to engage and just cherry pick the cais affected indviduals, but it won't wash. You're being evasive and deliberately manipulative.

No one here is threatening violence. I don't believe any person commenting here would be violent. I don't believe any of us would cause any harm. But we do want fairness for the female sex. And if that upsets a few people then sorry, it has to be that way. Women are being asked to give up so much for a few. That's definitely not fair.

I suggest you hide the thread.

You're cherry picking. Hide the thread.

Actually I think there would be an argument for women with Turner's syndrome (X0) having a paralympic category, ditto men with Klinefelter's (XXY +) - I would expect either syndrome to cause significant disadvantage in elite sport (not all sports though) and both are fairly common.

And around we go.

At what point is the responsibility of an athlete that chooses to compete in a sports category that they are excluded from based on a proven advantage absolved?

If it is decided, with evidence, in the future to exclude CAIS athletes and there are other options for them to compete, why is that something that you, personally, believe that female athletes should just accept? Is it genuinely because of the emotional reasons?

Because even if they have a 'F' on their birth certificate, what makes those athletes different from any other athlete excluded from a protected category that they have been excluded from on the basis of evidence of advantage? I do not doubt it is upsetting for some people. However, the regulations are there to ensure that one protected category has safety and fairness from athletes falling outside that protected category.

You keep referring to children. The majority of the people competing at the olympics are adults.

I doubt that very much in most countries.

In any case, it doesn't affect their eligibility for women's sports categories.