The IOC: “ we don’t want a return to the bad old days of sex testing”

[InterrudelyUpted]

I want to give some really important context to this: it was a classic “throwing the baby out with the bathwater “ argument.

Of all the many types of DSDs that affect people born with XY chromosomes, Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS) is one of the rare ones that confers no male puberty advantage at all. That’s because no matter how much testosterone may be circulating inside your endocrine system, your body is completely immune to it. People affected by this have zero male advantage, apart from possibly being a bit taller than average. They grow up looking completely female on the outside, with pretty typical female muscles and speed and strength and pelvis width and everything.

But CAIS people were used as an example of whataboutery to show the flaw in a straightforward argument that “all XY people have an advantage because of going through male puberty”.

It’s actually quite simple to separate out CAIS from other people with XY chromosomes, your genetic test comes back showing you have XY chromosomes but then they very quickly establish that you no receptors and therefore no male puberty and no male advantage. And CAIS women tend to be pretty shit at sports anyway due to the aforementioned lack of testosterone. But hey go, that’s where we are.

Can’t do sex testing in sports because it might theoretically offend a small bunch of people with a DSD who actually want to be left completely out of it anyway.

Its less invasive that a covid test...

Corruption?
Money?
Backhanders?
Misogyny?
All of the above?

so, if I have this right, the IOC binned sex tests (of any sort) in 1999 (which incidentally means they have no way of making a determination of the sex of any competitor, beyond a passport). They did this despite 82% of women athletes wanting to keep them. Not remotely suspicious at all. It does increasingly look like the TRA's have been beavering away in the background for decades, which explains why we are in this current mess. If only a proper journalist could overturn some stones I dare say the results could be of interest.

Brilliant.

And because it's soo stupid, and soo easily disprovable, I'm sure this is all going to unravel - straight to the point of reality.

Hardly anyone is a TRA, or doesn't understand basic biology, or is ideologically driven.

Proper, grown-up, informed people will prevail.

It's astonishing, isn't it!

You can get a letter from your doctor to change your passport.

Absolutely no changes necessary.

I wonder if this will make Starmer think again about how simplifying the acquisition of a GRC might just have future implications.

My money is on they are all evil bigots.
By which I mean the women who votes in favour of testing, not the IOC who ignored them.

😁

Transphobic,racist bigots who probably voted Reform.

Doubtless the IOC expect everyone to understand that asking women's opinion is a social nicety and polite convention. There's no intention of heeding what the majority say and acting on it. (Thinking of all the consultations I've filled out and that CS or govt. decided to set aside.)

ETA:

who probably voted Reform.

All of the women athletes who live outside the UK and have non-UK nationalities managed to vote in the 1990s and vote Reform @ 30 years later?

Truly no end to the perfidy and squeakiness of women.

The bad old days when we had to keep men out of women’s sport, is that it?

Note the product placement during his speech-making.

It’s important to have your priorities straight obviously.

There is no level to which we will not stoop.

Got to keep your corporate sponsors happy in every way...

If I were the Coca Cola CEO I'd be getting concerned about my products being associated with this shower.

They may be pushing the DEI buttons to satisfy a marketing demographic. Many companies are.

Be happy Coke! We’re letting men batter women in the name of progress!

@Helleofabore you have read the statistics from that Nature article wrong. The article clearly states the number of people with any form of androgen insensitivity syndrome, but then most importantly breaks them down into the complete form and the incomplete or partial form. You’ve lumped them all together as having the complete form when that was less than half the group.

You might think ‘so what?’ but the whole point of starting this thread was to try to explain the difference between CAIS and other forms of DSDs that confer a male advantage, like 5-ard and PAIS.

This is so important because it helps explain the IOC’s (faulty) reasons to stop sex testing… they argued It wasn’t fair because it would exclude people (eg CAIS) who do not have a male puberty advantage.

We really need to understand the differences in order to effectively argue against their policy.

To be fair, I am surprised that there was still quite a significant number of CAIS athletes – even if it’s only 3/3,386, that’s actually still quite a lot compared to on a population basis.

Yes, I said they’re over-represented and they have advantages over females.

It’s reasonable to debate whether the fact athletes with CAIS never having to deal with the one of the fundamental differences in biology between males and females - periods - is an advantage worth segregating for. It is not reasonable to claim it isn’t an advantage at all. Of course it is.

Sure. Thanks for pointing it out.

The points I make using the paper remain unchanged but don’t they? That is the group that argued for sex testing to be stopped for the inclusion of male people with DSDs. All male people with DSDs. Not just those who don’t process testosterone?

I was a little astonished to hear the final interviewee admit that, if these boxers are judged inelligible to compete then that will jepoardise trans women's paticipation in women's sport.

I have been wondering if athletes with DSDs are being used as a sort of Trojan horse to allow males with a trans identity into women's sports.

After all, in terms of sporting ability, what is the fundamental difference between a man with XY chromosomes who was brought up as a girl, so thinks he is a woman, but has male levels of testosterone and a body which looks just like any other man and a man with XY chromosomes who thinks he is a woman because he believes he has a womanly brain, but has male levels of testosterone and a body which looks just like any other man?

How can you argue to let one group in but not the other?

InterrudelyUpted

CAIS males will have had the same reduced access to sporting resources and faced the same prejudices as women and girls. So if the incidence of CAIS males at the Olympic Games is higher than in the general population, as you say, that creates a strong presumption of advantage.

NotBadConsidering

All males should be excluded because males as a class have an advantage over women (which is not entirely due to the effect of pubertal testosterone, InterrudelyUpted).

That's why I don't think it matters how significant the advantage of CAIS males is, because we shouldn't carve out a specific group of males and say that this group have a sufficiently reduced advantage to make them competitive with women, though not with men. That argument could be applied to call for the inclusion of any group of males whose medical condition or disability makes them competitive with women, but not with men. But we don't include those men in the female category.

I suggest that one of the reasons some wish to treat the class of CAIS males differently to males with a disability or limiting medical condition is the outwardly female phenotype. But being female means being of the sex that produces large gametes. CAIS are not of that sex and that is the fundamental reason why they should not be in female sport.

The crossing of categories only works one way - males in female sport. There are no conditions which cause females to have an advantage over males.

I understand the concerns over privacy, etc, but ways can be found around this. We can't sacrifice fairness and opportunities for women and girls to protect males from issues which those women and girls didn't create, are not responsible for.

Does that make sense to you?

I have been wondering if athletes with DSDs are being used as a sort of Trojan horse to allow males with a trans identity into women's sports.
It's my view that they are - although that isn't the basis of my argument for excluding males with DSDs above.

I completely agree with you. I wanted to make it clear it’s a myth that “no male puberty from testosterone” is all that matters.

Oh, ok! 😀