Caster Semenya: The Idiocy of Sex Testing

[Love As Arson]

World-class South African athlete Caster Semenya, age 18, won the 800 meters in the International Association of Athletics Federations World Championships on August 19. But her victory was all the more remarkable in that she was forced to run amid a controversy that reveals the twisted way international track and field views gender.

The sports world has been buzzing for some time over the rumor that Semenya may be a man, or more specifically, not "entirely female." According to the newspaper The Age, her "physique and powerful style have sparked speculation in recent months that she may not be entirely female." From all accounts an arduous process of "gender testing" on Semenya has already begun. The idea that an 18-year-old who has just experienced the greatest athletic victory of her life is being subjecting to this very public humiliation is shameful to say the least.

Her own coach Michael Seme contributed to the disgrace when he said, "We understand that people will ask questions because she looks like a man. It's a natural reaction and it's only human to be curious. People probably have the right to ask such questions if they are in doubt. But I can give you the telephone numbers of her roommates in Berlin. They have already seen her naked in the showers and she has nothing to hide."

The people with something to hide are the powers that be in track and field, as well as in international sport. As long as there have been womens' sports, the characterization of the best female athletes as "looking like men" or "mannish" has consistently been used to degrade them. When Martina Navratilova dominated women's tennis and proudly exposed her chiseled biceps years before Hollywood gave its imprimatur to gals with "guns," players complained that she "must have a chromosome loose somewhere."

This minefield of sexism and homophobia has long pushed female athletes into magazines like Maxim to prove their "hotness"--and implicitly their heterosexuality. Track and field in particular has always had this preoccupation with gender, particularly when it crosses paths with racism. Fifty years ago, Olympic official Norman Cox proposed that in the case of black women, "the International Olympic Committee should create a special category of competition for them--the unfairly advantaged 'hermaphrodites.'"

For years, women athletes had to parade naked in front of Olympic officials. This has now given way to more "sophisticated" "gender testing" to determine if athletes like Semenya have what officials still perceive as the ultimate advantage--being a man. Let's leave aside that being male is not the be-all, end-all of athletic success. A country's wealth, coaching facilities, nutrition and opportunity determine the creation of a world-class athlete far more than a Y chromosome or a penis ever could.

What these officials still don't understand, or will not confront, is that gender--that is, how we comport and conceive of ourselves--is a remarkably fluid social construction. Even our physical sex is far more ambiguous and fluid than is often imagined or taught. Medical science has long acknowledged the existence of millions of people whose bodies combine anatomical features that are conventionally associated with either men or women and/or have chromosomal variations from the XX or XY of women or men. Many of these "intersex" individuals, estimated at one birth in every 1,666 in the United States alone, are legally operated on by surgeons who force traditional norms of genitalia on newborn infants. In what some doctors consider a psychosocial emergency, thousands of healthy babies are effectively subject to clitorectomies if a clitoris is "too large" or castrations if a penis is "too small" (evidently penises are never considered "too big").

The physical reality of intersex people calls into question the fixed notions we are taught to accept about men and women in general, and men and women athletes in sex-segregated sports like track and field in particular. The heretical bodies of intersex people challenge the traditional understanding of gender as a strict male/female phenomenon. While we are never encouraged to conceive of bodies this way, male and female bodies are more similar than they are distinguishable from each other. When training and nutrition are equal, it is increasingly difficult to tell the difference between some of the best-trained male and female Olympic swimmers wearing state-of-the-art one-piece speed suits. Title IX, the 1972 law imposing equal funding for girls' and boys' sports in schools, has radically altered not only women's fitness and emotional well-being but their bodies as well. Obviously, there are some physical differences between men and women, but it is largely our culture and not biology that gives them their meaning.

In 1986 Spanish hurdler Maria José Martínez-Patiño was stripped of her first-place winnings when discovered to have an XY chromosome, instead of the female's XX, which shattered her athletic career and upended her personal life. "I lost friends, my fiancé, hope and energy," said Martínez-Patiño in a 2005 editorial in the journal The Lancet.

Whatever track and field tells us Caster Semenya's gender is--and as of this writing there is zero evidence she is intersex--it's time we all break free from the notion that you are either "one or the other." It's antiquated, stigmatizing and says far more about those doing the testing than about the athletes tested. The only thing suspicious is the gender and sex bias in professional sports. We should continue to debate the pros and cons of gender segregation in sport. But right here, right now, we must end sex testing and acknowledge the fluidity of gender and sex in sports and beyond.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090831/zirin_wolf

[jusscali]

If the girl isn't really a girl then the medal(s) should be taken away.

[Josh Weinstein]

I personally don't care if the person in question is a man. Just like the fact that Andy Kaufman was the inter-gender wrestling champion back in the early 80's. He kicked the shit out of those female wrestlers.

[zion the lion]

This story pissed me off the first time I heard about it. I cant even imagine how this girl is feeling. I'm pretty sure she didnt suddenly gain the "masculine" features right after she the world championships, so why is it that they publicly questioned her gender around the time of this race? If they're going to question one athlete, why not question them all? The IAAF completely failed in handling this the right way, it's pathetic.

She's a woman, she was raised one, she's got the more obvious physical signs of being one, so this is just ridiculous.

[saysmydoctor]

Disgusting.

[QuikTrig]

This story pissed me off the first time I heard about it. I cant even imagine how this girl is feeling. I'm pretty sure she didnt suddenly gain the "masculine" features right after she the world championships, so why is it that they publicly questioned her gender around the time of this race? If they're going to question one athlete, why not question them all? The IAAF completely failed in handling this the right way, it's pathetic.

She's a woman, she was raised one, she's got the more obvious physical signs of being one, so this is just ridiculous.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26057893-5015718,00.html

[QuikTrig]

For years, women athletes had to parade naked in front of Olympic officials. This has now given way to more "sophisticated" "gender testing" to determine if athletes like Semenya have what officials still perceive as the ultimate advantage--being a man. Let's leave aside that being male is not the be-all, end-all of athletic success. A country's wealth, coaching facilities, nutrition and opportunity determine the creation of a world-class athlete far more than a Y chromosome or a penis ever could.

uhh. no.


The physical reality of intersex people calls into question the fixed notions we are taught to accept about men and women in general, and men and women athletes in sex-segregated sports like track and field in particular. The heretical bodies of intersex people challenge the traditional understanding of gender as a strict male/female phenomenon. While we are never encouraged to conceive of bodies this way, male and female bodies are more similar than they are distinguishable from each other. When training and nutrition are equal, it is increasingly difficult to tell the difference between some of the best-trained male and female Olympic swimmers wearing state-of-the-art one-piece speed suits. Title IX, the 1972 law imposing equal funding for girls' and boys' sports in schools, has radically altered not only women's fitness and emotional well-being but their bodies as well. Obviously, there are some physical differences between men and women, but it is largely our culture and not biology that gives them their meaning. not biology? what the fuck is this talking about.

But right here, right now, we must end sex testing and acknowledge the fluidity of gender and sex in sports and beyond.
sure. i can't wait to win a gold medal in women's soccer. sure will be fun.

i hope the author realizes that a real woman would never win a woman's sport if men tried to infiltrate it.

dumb article for the most part.


(http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090831/zirin_wolf)

[buttons]

uhh. no.
not biology? what the fuck is this talking about.


(http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090831/zirin_wolf)

I'm learning in one of my classes that inequality between the sexes has arisen out of our exaggerating the differences between the two. some may think that the differences between us lead to inquality, but it does in fact happen that it's the other way around. in other words, differences do not lead to inequality, but rather inequality causes us to exaggerate the differences between us, thus somehow "justifying" this inequality.

pardon me if i'm being incoherent at the moment, i'm not entirely sober.

[caveBEAR]

I'm learning in one of my classes that inequality between the sexes has arisen out of our exaggerating the differences between the two. some may think that the differences between us lead to inquality, but it does in fact happen that it's the other way around. in other words, differences do not lead to inequality, but rather inequality causes us to exaggerate the differences between us, thus somehow "justifying" this inequality.

pardon me if i'm being incoherent at the moment, i'm not entirely sober.

I agree to a point. Put a big log in front of the average man and the average woman, though, and the man will have an easier time moving it.

[zion the lion]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26057893-5015718,00.html

Not being rude, I'm just oblivious, but why link this?

[caveBEAR]

Not being rude, I'm just oblivious, but why link this?

Because it shows that she was a real hermaphrodite, so people's concerns weren't unwarranted.

[zion the lion]

Because it shows that she was a real hermaphrodite, so people's concerns weren't unwarranted.

But I already knew that, and she's still a woman, she was raised one, she's one mentally, she has a vagina, she's a woman. And even though there might have been a legitimate reason for some concerns, it shouldn't have been put out there for all the world to know.

[caveBEAR]

But I already knew that, and she's still a woman, she was raised one, she's one mentally, she has a vagina, she's a woman. And even though there might have been a legitimate reason for some concerns, it shouldn't have been put out there for all the world to know.

She has testes. Like, you know, balls. The two things that make you not a woman. She would be a hermaphrodite.

[J.C.]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/Futurama_ep67.jpg

[zion the lion]

She has testes. Like, you know, balls. The two things that make you not a woman. She would be a hermaphrodite.

There are other things that go into gender identity...

[Ben09]

Well, she has to stripped of her medal.

[caveBEAR]

There are other things that go into gender identity...

Of course there are, but sports and gender identity are two entirely different things. Have me play a football game against a guy, it's probably an even match. Have me play against a girl, and I probably have the upper hand. It's why we separate the genders. Now put me up in football against a hermaphrodite...maybe my odds aren't as good as against the girl.

[J.C.]

I admittedly have no idea/opinion on how something like this thing should be dealt with. I do know, however, that whether men would dominate women's sports if they were allowed to compete against them is irrelevant to the argument. You're drastically underestimating what really good female athletes are capable of in certain sports, which is a separate argument altogether and probably not worth delving into.

[zion the lion]

Well, she has to stripped of her medal.

She broke records, and she worked hard for the metal, she deserves to keep it.

Of course there are, but sports and gender identity are two entirely different things. Have me play a football game against a guy, it's probably an even match. Have me play against a girl, and I probably have the upper hand. It's why we separate the genders. Now put me up in football against a hermaphrodite...maybe my odds aren't as good as against the girl.

I quit sports a long time ago so correct me if I'm wrong, but dont runners and football players need somewhat different physical qualities to be good at their sport? My friend was the state champ (for running) in Alaska and in Washington I think, and his sister in the top at her college and here in Alaska and they were both ridiculously skinny which isnt something you would normally see in a football player.

I cant find much, but as far as I can tell, she has complete androgen insensitivity syndrome which makes her pretty much a woman, the testes dont make too much of a difference.

Also, I consider myself average, I dont lift weights at the gym or anything, and I am positive that I am 100% female (no testes in my abdomen), but I'm stronger than a lot of the average guys I know who dont go to the gym or lift weights. My uterus doesnt change my ability to play sports and play them well.

[caveBEAR]

She broke records, and she worked hard for the metal, she deserves to keep it.



I quit sports a long time ago so correct me if I'm wrong, but dont runners and football players need somewhat different physical qualities to be good at their sport? My friend was the state champ (for running) in Alaska and in Washington I think, and his sister in the top at her college and here in Alaska and they were both ridiculously skinny which isnt something you would normally see in a football player.

I cant find much, but as far as I can tell, she has complete androgen insensitivity syndrome which makes her pretty much a woman, the testes dont make too much of a difference.

Also, I consider myself average, I dont lift weights at the gym or anything, and I am positive that I am 100% female (no testes in my abdomen), but I'm stronger than a lot of the average guys I know who dont go to the gym or lift weights. My uterus doesnt change my ability to play sports and play them well.

Yeah, but her testes would be making testosterone which would make her bigger, stronger and more aggressive.

[zion the lion]

Yeah, but her testes would be making testosterone which would make her bigger, stronger and more aggressive.

I was under the impression that female runners had higher levels of testosterone anyway.

Again, I might be wrong.

[caveBEAR]

I was under the impression that female runners had higher levels of testosterone anyway.

Again, I might be wrong.

Not higher than a male runner.

[zion the lion]

Not higher than a male runner.

And she's not a man.

[caveBEAR]

And she's not a man.

She has testes. This makes testosterone.

So let's try to make this as easy to understand as possible;

Girl runner - Higher levels of testosterone from running.
This chick - Higher levels of testosterone from testes and running.
Boy runner - Higer levels of testosterone from testes and running.


See the potential problem here?

[Nevuk]

Sexual identity and Gender identity are separate, and people tend to ignore this, on both sides. Sex and Gender have no relationship to each other.

A hermaphrodite, if we're doing this on a purely physical basis, would probably be disadvantaged vs males in a male race. So should hermaphrodites be prevented from any competition at all? If we listed all the hermaphrodite runners in serious competition today, I'm betting there's just one.

An interesting thing about female athletes/in competition is the example of Tossgirl. Most people aren't going to know wtf I'm talking about here, but I follow the professional Starcraft scene (lol) and she's the only female player who still plays at this level, and outperformed every other female to the extent they disbanded female leagues. However, after entering the male scene she rapidly fell behind and was and is treated as a novelty figure/sex object. This treatment itself probably lends to why she wasn't even close to successful (She has the lowest ELO rating of any player), along with poor nerves. There's not really any physical reason why women would be worse at SC. All that's necessary for SC is high multitasking ability and high reflexes/finger speed, not things I've ever heard associated more with men than women. Koreans still separated the leagues and etc., and for the valid reason that the female gamers couldn't compete on the same level with the male ones.
(My guess would be culture, as Korean culture is probably much more encouraging for men to pursue a career in such a fashion than a woman).

[zion the lion]

She has testes. This makes testosterone.

So let's try to make this as easy to understand as possible;

Girl runner - Higher levels of testosterone from running.
This chick - Higher levels of testosterone from testes and running.
Boy runner - Higer levels of testosterone from testes and running.


See the potential problem here?

The average adult male has 40 to 60 times more testosterone than the average adult female
Caster Semenya's had only 3 times as much as the average adult female
that's not significant enough to make her man, or to say that by your standards, she could beat you at football when I or any other woman with ovaries and a uterus could not.

[caveBEAR]

The average adult male has 40 to 60 times more testosterone than the average adult female
Caster Semenya's had only 3 times as much as the average adult female
that's not significant enough to make her man, or to say that by your standards, she could beat you at football when I or any other woman with ovaries and a uterus could not.

Still. You can see where the discrepancy comes from, correct? I'm not saying she should be stripped of the medal or not, or whether she should compete with men or women, just pointing out the reasons why people have a problem with it.

[Nevuk]

Not higher than a male runner.
Maybe not male runners, but definitely more than some males.

[QuikTrig]

I admittedly have no idea/opinion on how something like this thing should be dealt with. I do know, however, that whether men would dominate women's sports if they were allowed to compete against them is irrelevant to the argument.

same. i have no idea what they should do and i'm not going to pretend like i do. i just didn't like the tone of the original article. it tried to make this some sort of political argument for equal rights or something ... when it really isn't the case at all.


You're drastically underestimating what really good female athletes are capable of in certain sports, which is a separate argument altogether and probably not worth delving into.

ha but a very interesting argument. and all my girl friends call me out on it, but really....what sports are women better at than men? cause i honestly can't think of any. if anyone knows any, feel free to let me know.

[SpacePunk]

what sports are women better at than men? cause i honestly can't think of any. if anyone knows any, feel free to let me know.

Netball?

[Duexy]

In 1986 Spanish hurdler Maria José Martínez-Patiño was stripped of her first-place winnings when discovered to have an XY chromosome, instead of the female's XX, which shattered her athletic career and upended her personal life. "I lost friends, my fiancé, hope and energy," said Martínez-Patiño in a 2005 editorial in the journal The Lancet.



Probably TL;DR for most, but this is an interesting read:

http://www.medhelp.org/ais/articles/MARIA.HTM


At birth, the child looks like a girl. The only sign that something is different is the presence of the testes, either in the labia or in the lower part of the groin, but doctors will miss those without a close examination. At puberty, the girl develops breasts and a woman's body. Although she has no ovaries to make female hormones, her body transforms some of the testosterone and androstenedione produced by the testes into the female hormone estradiol, and there is enough estradiol to trigger her maturation into a woman. Because she has no uterus, however, she does not menstruate. This may prompt her to go to a gynecologist, who will discover that she has no internal female organs, her vagina has a dead end, and she is carrying a pair of testes. The doctor will usually recommend removing the testes because they might turn cancerous, and then will prescribe estrogen replacement to substitute for the hormones that had been produced by the testes. If, as sometimes happens, the vagina is too short for comfortable intercourse, it can be stretched. Other than that - and the fact that she cannot have children - the XY woman is no different from an XX female. If anything, she's more likely to match the Western male standards of a beautiful woman, with long legs, well-developed breasts and clear skin. She could have a height advantage in sports or may become a fashion model, an occupation that supposedly holds a number of XY women, or a movie actress. Indeed, there are at least two well-known American movie stars who are XY women, according to researchers in sex differences, although neither of the actresses wishes her condition to be made public.

felt this part of the article to be somewhat relevant here

[Sventhegreat]

Gotta check under da' hood, see if there's an ornament or not.

[QuikTrig]

Other than that - and the fact that she cannot have children - the XY woman is no different from an XX female. If anything, she's more likely to match the Western male standards of a beautiful woman, with long legs, well-developed breasts and clear skin. She could have a height advantage in sports or may become a fashion model, an occupation that supposedly holds a number of XY women, or a movie actress. Indeed, there are at least two well-known American movie stars who are XY women, according to researchers in sex differences, although neither of the actresses wishes her condition to be made public.

haha that's a pretty big "other than that".

and semenya sure doesn't match the western male standards of a beautiful woman. then it proceeds to support this by claim saying there's two american movie stars. of hundreds, even thousands. am i the only one who finds these articles silly? just acknowledge the physical differences and promote acceptance. don't undermine them just because people may be uncomfortable to hear it.

[QuikTrig]

Netball?

really? i know absolutely nothing at the sport.

is it because men may not play it as much as women (like softball)? i tried googling some stuff about it but found nothing. i just find it hard to believe that anything that requires physical/athletic aptitude could be dominated by women.

[Duexy]

haha that's a pretty big "other than that".

and semenya sure doesn't match the western male standards of a beautiful woman. then it proceeds to support this by claim saying there's two american movie stars. of hundreds, even thousands. am i the only one who finds these articles silly? just acknowledge the physical differences and promote acceptance. don't undermine them just because people may be uncomfortable to hear it.

The article isn't about Caster, I just figured since she has the same condition that the Spanish hurdler did I would share some back info on the subject. Also it says there are at least two well-known american movie stars. What is it exactly that you find so silly about the article?

[QuikTrig]

The article isn't about Caster, I just figured since she has the same condition that the Spanish hurdler did I would share some back info on the subject. Also it says there are at least two well-known american movie stars. What is it exactly that you find so silly about the article?

because if they only have evidence that there's two (and who knows if they even have proof -- but that's a different story) hermaphrodites in Hollywood, why use that as evidence in proving that they are attractive/common/anything else? it's two of several hundreds. who know's what they mean by well-known. and "at least" doesn't mean anything. obviously its being used semantically to drive the author's point home. There can be exactly two and their phrasing would still be accurate.

perhaps silly is the wrong word, but i'm tired of these articles explaining differences, and then brushing them off. as in, "i'll give you a two page essay about how hermaphrodites are different, then in the closing paragraph claim that there are barely any differences and we should ignore them." what is so wrong with being different? people are different. it's a fact of life. i strongly believe the road to acceptance is through understanding and recognizing these differences. Through time, people will learn that perhaps these differences should not have any bearing on how to see a person. Cut the bullshit and tell it how it is.

[caveBEAR]

perhaps silly is the wrong word, but i'm tired of these articles explaining differences, and then brushing them off. as in, "i'll give you a two page essay about how hermaphrodites are different, then in the closing paragraph claim that there are barely any differences and we should ignore them." what is so wrong with being different? people are different. it's a fact of life. i strongly believe the road to acceptance is through understanding and recognizing these differences. Through time, people will learn that perhaps these differences should not have any bearing on how to see a person. Cut the bullshit and tell it how it is.

If I could frame this I would hang it on my wall. Well said.

[MyNameIsRoss]

I was ignorant to the fact that hermaphrodites are a common occurrence..

[Love As Arson]

same. i have no idea what they should do and i'm not going to pretend like i do. i just didn't like the tone of the original article. it tried to make this some sort of political argument for equal rights or something ... when it really isn't the case at all.
If you think sports isn't political,then you're a moron. A woman had her medal taken from her because she doesn't meet our criteria of what it means to be a woman. That is what makes it about equal rights,not only for the transgendered but homosexuals as well because of the deep-seated homophobia that is also present when discussing the issue; a woman with male parts seems to be the worst thing ever.
ha but a very interesting argument. and all my girl friends call me out on it, but really....what sports are women better at than men? cause i honestly can't think of any. if anyone knows any, feel free to let me know.
Well, that was incredibly sexist. The question you might want to ask is, what would the nature of competition be if women and men weren't inculcated with gender stereotypes at an early age?

uhh. no.

So, you think gender plays a greater role than these things? Do you believe countries without access to running water are on an equal playing field with first-world countries, as far as the likelihood of producing successful athletes?

.
not biology? what the fuck is this talking about.
Biology is a description of physical characteristics. Western culture has allowed those characteristics to define identity and behaviour; for example, the idea that having a vagina means you must be feminine. Without all of these ideas as to how one should act because they have certain parts, we can form our own identities and behaviours.

sure. i can't wait to win a gold medal in women's soccer. sure will be fun.
I think those women would trounce you, which might damage the argument that men are better than women in sports.

[QuikTrig]

If you think sports isn't political,then you're a moron. A woman had her medal taken from her because she doesn't meet our criteria of what it means to be a woman. That is what makes it about equal rights,not only for the transgendered but homosexuals as well because of the deep-seated homophobia that is also present when discussing the issue; a woman with male parts seems to be the worst thing ever. i would assume there are guidelines in the sport that determine if a woman is eligible to participate. i have barely heard any political outrage about it until one major case comes along and blows up in the media. what do you suggest they should do? eliminate all criteria/rules? as i said before, if this occurred, it would be the end of a lot of womens sports.

Well, that was incredibly sexist. The question you might want to ask is, what would the nature of competition be if women and men weren't inculcated with gender stereotypes at an early age? not sure how it is sexist. men are undeniably more successful at sports than women. fact. cite the reasons if you wish, but this is reality.


So, you think gender plays a greater role than these things? Do you believe countries without access to running water are on an equal playing field with first-world countries, as far as the likelihood of producing successful athletes?
i'm saying that a penis and balls will make someone faster than a clean cup of water will. read the original article. the fact that it's saying training facilities is a bigger difference than biological differences between gender is absurd. it is nowhere near it.


Biology is a description of physical characteristics. Western culture has allowed those characteristics to define identity and behaviour; for example, the idea that having a vagina means you must be feminine. Without all of these ideas as to how one should act because they have certain parts, we can form our own identities and behaviours.
not sure how these identities and behaviors play into sports at all. i feel we're arguing two different things. you can feel the way you feel about gender equality, which is fine. but these identities and behaviors have nothing to do with their performance on the field. it's a biological advantage for men. unless a change in the social structure of gender can suddenly make women more agile, stronger, and coordinated, then i don't see how this is relevant.

I think those women would trounce you, which might damage the argument that men are better than women in sports.
you could not be any more wrong about this.

[SLOWPOKE LOPEZ]

this isnt discrimination or fear of weakened sexual roles. this is sports. you have to establish a level playing field. it has nothing to do with acceptance, it has everything to do with fairness to the sport and the other athletes involved.
does it suck that she wants to participate but can't? yes. guess what, thats life. you dont always get what you want. she doesn't fit the criteria, she can't participate. thats that.

[Love As Arson]

i would assume there are guidelines in the sport that determine if a woman is eligible to participate. i have barely heard any political outrage about it until one major case comes along and blows up in the media. what do you suggest they should do? eliminate all criteria/rules? as i said before, if this occurred, it would be the end of a lot of womens sports.

They just have to eliminate those which are discriminatory.

not sure how it is sexist. men are undeniably more successful at sports than women. fact. cite the reasons if you wish, but this is reality.
And,of course, patriarchy and environment are irrelevant. I won't argue with you if you're set on believing in those type of universal absolutes.


i'm saying that a penis and balls will make someone faster than a clean cup of water will. read the original article. the fact that it's saying training facilities is a bigger difference than biological differences between gender is absurd. it is nowhere near it.
Biology is the foundation. How it is expressed is determined by culture and environment. A female athlete in the US,with access to health care and a gym, would likely be more competitive than a male from a third-world country, for example.


not sure how these identities and behaviors play into sports at all.
Men have dominated sports because they are oriented towards it at a young age, whereas women are oriented towards things considered female, like housework or cooking. This is related to our conversation because it demonstrates how we've allowed physical characteristics,like a vagina, to create identities and norms for behaviour; this reinforces a view of gender which is rigid, so when someone like Caster comes along they are viciously attacked for not abiding by those standards.
,
it's a biological advantage for men. unless a change in the social structure of gender can suddenly make women more agile, stronger, and coordinated, then i don't see how this is relevant.
Social conditions do have an effect on biology.

Women marathon runners have improved their times by about 61% since 1955, while men's times in marathons have advanced by only 18%.
http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Women-Ethel-Sloane/dp/0766811425

[Love As Arson]

it has nothing to do with acceptance, it has everything to do with fairness to the sport and the other athletes involved.

Shall we ban the children of athletes from participating due to the biological edge they may have?

[QuikTrig]

They just have to eliminate those which are discriminatory. anything is discriminatory. do you have a specific set of rules you want to see put in? how can you gender test without being discriminatory -- its discriminatory by definition.


Biology is the foundation. How it is expressed is determined by culture and environment. A female athlete in the US,with access to health care and a gym, would likely be more competitive than a male from a third-world country, for example.

i disagree. obviously if you're picking some random schmo, the woman would be more adept at her respective sport. but the article framed it with the assumption you are talking about elite athletes. a woman can have a world-class training facility and the best nutritionist in the world -- chances are, depending on the sport, that the top 50 men in that same sport would be better, regardless of their facilities, nutrition, etc.


Men have dominated sports because they are oriented towards it at a young age, whereas women are oriented towards things considered female, like housework or cooking. This is related to our conversation because it demonstrates how we've allowed physical characteristics,like a vagina, to create identities and norms for behaviour; this reinforces a view of gender which is rigid, so when someone like Caster comes along they are viciously attacked for not abiding by those standards. this isn't 1930. tons of girls are playing sports at the same age as boys. girls teams practice and are just as "competitive" as boys teams (and are provided with the same facilities, etc). they are still not as good. hahah she was attacked for not abiding by those standards? she was attacked because she wasn't eligible for the sport. i think the situation was humiliating, but thats mostly the medias fault -- not because of faulty rules.

Social conditions do have an effect on biology.

I would like to learn more about this.


http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Women-Ethel-Sloane/dp/0766811425

as more people participate, your bound to have better results. without checking, i would assume that women's participation in marathons has risen at a similar rate. it's also a lot harder to improve on elite times at a certain level. results begin to diminish as athletes approach "perfection", for lack of a better word. i just checked a couple track and field times from 1960 to 2004. the times for both genders are becoming better at essentially the same rate.

[SLOWPOKE LOPEZ]

Shall we ban the children of athletes from participating due to the biological edge they may have?
oh jesus stop it with the melodramatic bullshit. you're so hell-bent on exposing social injustice you've lost touch with reality and become a complete parody of yourself.
should we eliminate seperate weight classes in high school wrestling so as not to upset the big kids? maybe i should enter the paralympics, since i think its totally unfair that i can't compete just because i was born with two healthy legs...
i know its your thing to rally against the system and fight against the percieved superior society, but your act is getting old.

[saysmydoctor]

oh jesus stop it with the melodramatic bullshit. you're so hell-bent on exposing social injustice you've lost touch with reality and become a complete parody of yourself.
should we eliminate seperate weight classes in high school wrestling so as not to upset the big kids? maybe i should enter the paralympics, since i think its totally unfair that i can't compete just because i was born with two healthy legs...
i know its your thing to rally against the system and fight against the percieved superior society, but your act is getting old.
Or we could eliminate the Paralympics and weight classes.

[SLOWPOKE LOPEZ]

lets just get rid of sports altogether. if no one can compete, then no one will feel left out.

[saysmydoctor]

No one implied that.

[SockMonkeyRiot]

If you look at the world record progression for the women's marathon you will see that in 15 years (from 1964 to 1979) the record has dropped over an hour, this is main due to two things:

1. Women weren't allowed to participate in most Marathons until the 1970s, Boston allowed women in 1972, the first Olympic Women's Marathon was in 1984. In fact, the Olympics didn't even have an event over 200 meters until the 800 in 1960 (Aside from 1 games in 1928) and the 1500 in 1970.

2. Recreational running and road races, especially the Marathon, became very popular in the 1970s.

That is why the world record progressed so much in the 1970s for women, if you look at the improvement in the 70s it is astonishing but since Waitz ran 2:27 in 1979 the record has only progressed 11 minutes, and there have only been 9 women under 2:20.

100 Meters
Florence Griffith-Joyner 10.49 in 1988 (there is a strong possibility this record was wind-aided as well). Nobody has run faster than 10.73 since besides Marion Jones who was doped to the gills.

200 Meters
Florence Griffith-Joyner 21.32 in 1988. Again the second fastest time is 21.62 by Marion Jones who was on steriods, one other woman has run in the 21.6's the world leader has been hovering around 21.7-21.8 for the last 20 years.

400 Meters
Marita Koch 47.60 in 1985. One other Woman under 48 in 1983, 3rd best all time is from 1996, Sanya Richards, who has been one of the best 400 meter runners for the past 4 years and absolutely dominated everyone this year has been running high 48s.

800 Meters
Jarmila Kratochvílová ran 1:53.28 in 1983, the world leading times since then have been between 1:54 and 1:57.

1500 Meters
Yunxia Qu ran 3:50.46 in 1993, world leading times have been between 3:55 and 4:00s for the last 10 years

The IAAF didn't even ratify the first women's 5000 meter world record until 1981, it saw a huge improvement from 15:16 to 14:37 in 5 years then slowed down. Similar situation in the women's 10,000 meters.

Sorry, I love track and field, I probably wrote too much and put up too many meaningless times to you people but the point is that women's world records aren't progressing at a ridiculous rate and most of the remarkable improvement of the past coincide with introduction of the event to world competitions and growing popularity of women's sports. The only records that have been set or approached recently have been the distance events (5k, 10k, Marathon) where Paula Radcliffe is pretty much amazing and the East Africans have started to dominate.

[QuikTrig]

so my assumptions were basically correct. thanks for the info. how about men's running?

[x togepi x]

uhh. no.
not biology? what the fuck is this talking about.


sure. i can't wait to win a gold medal in women's soccer. sure will be fun.

i hope the author realizes that a real woman would never win a woman's sport if men tried to infiltrate it.

dumb article for the most part.


(http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090831/zirin_wolf)

ah, you gotta love the sexism in this post.

[QuikTrig]

ah, you gotta love the sexism in this post.

why thank you! want to point out what isn't true about it?

[SockMonkeyRiot]

so my assumptions were basically correct. thanks for the info. how about men's running?

From 2000-Present there have been 19 Men's world records in Track (5 in the 100, 2 in the 200, 2 in the 3,000 Steeplechase, 1 in the 5,000, 2 in the 10,000, 4 in the Marathon and 3 in the 110 Hurdles). There have been 17 Women's (8 in the 3,000 Steeplechase, 4 in the 5,000, 4 in the Marathon, 1 in the 400 Hurdles).

Keep in mind the Women's 3,000 Steeplechase was not introduced as a World Championship Event until 2005, Olympic event until 2008.

In the field the Women have had much more world records in this decade, 34-0, with 29 in the Pole Vault and 5 in the Hammer Throw, both of which debuted at the Olympics in 2000. I didn't factor in Javelin Records because they have changed specifications on the Jav a few times which completely screws up the records.

[x togepi x]

why thank you! want to point out what isn't true about it?

basically all of your assumptions.

1. You're wrong for denying the claim that training facilities matter more than merely having a penis. This is empirically proven by every female athlete ever that's better at any sport than you. Your replies in this thread on this point are weak at best.

2. Your claim that differences in gender are biological is also wrong. The differences in biology are so minute that they hardly warrant the differences we see in socially constructed gender. This article calls into question what the fuck being a woman means. If gender is purely biological, i'd like you to explain transexuals to me in a way that isn't completely offensive/homophobic. This position isn't even that controversial. It's widely accepted that gender is socially constructed.

3. Your claim that the implications of this article stop at dumbasses like you getting to play women's soccer is completely asinine. This whole article is about gender roles. Male domination is based on the fact that men are "stronger" than women. Your arguments justify said subjugation. You can't say "nah, accept difference", because this difference is what justifies patriarchy. The differences are inherently hierarchical. They involve claims like "women are weaker than men physically", "women are less rational than men", etc. When you're already thinking X is better than Y, you can't claim "nah we'll just accept that X and Y are different", because those differences necessarily entail that line of reasoning.

4. Your claim that "no woman would ever win a sport if men tried to infiltrate it" is also unverifiable, as it's never been tried in a professional way. Even said comparison wouldn't be fair, as there are various factors, such as white male privilege, that would make it harder for a woman to win. Example: the fact that they would be considered sex objects would be an obstacle because many people think large muscles on women are unattractive, yet would be more than cool with similar muscle growth on a man. A lot of women athletes do have to look physically attractive in order to gain acceptance in their sport, and that can impact their performance in certain cases.

It's possible that a woman could functionally beat men in a sport. Hard? Sure, but not impossible. Slight biological advantages can be overcome. People play with injuries and still perform at a high level above uninjured people. People play sick. Once mediocre/terrible athletes suddenly become clutch and step up their game for a brief period of time. Why exactly can't this apply to women?

5. Forcing people to prove their identity, regardless of gender, can be damaging to their mental health. We even have posters here claiming she isn't a woman because she's supposedly a hermaphrodite. You try growing up within a specific gender construct only to be told later that you're "not a real man". This bothers a lot of people. Proving identities is inherently accusatory, it implies she cheated when she merely performed in her sport.

[Nevuk]

When Sojourner Truth gave a speech in the 1840s or 1850s, the people there demanded she reveal her breasts to prove she was a woman (she was a slave speaking about the effects of slavery on women).

[zion the lion]

Some of the things in this thread are so fucking ridiculous, it's just frustrating.

[TheFaceOfZach]

Caster Semenya

I know that's awful, I just couldn't help myself.

[Praetor]

When Sojourner Truth gave a speech in the 1840s or 1850s, the people there demanded she reveal her breasts to prove she was a woman (she was a slave speaking about the effects of slavery on women).
First thing I thought of when the story broke.

[Love As Arson]

The salacious sports media and the puritanical zealots that run international track and field have joined forces to hit a new low. Someone in the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) leaked to the press that Caster Semenya, the 18-year-old 800-meter track champion from South Africa, is, in the words of Oren Yaniv in the New York Daily News, both "a woman... and a man!"

After being subjected to a battery of "gender tests," which included invasive exams by a gynecologist, an endocrinologist and a psychologist, Semenya's private business is now presented for public consumption.

If the leaks are to be regarded as true, they show that Caster Semenya has internal testes and no womb or ovaries. She is possibly one of the millions of people in the world (one of 1,666 births in the United States alone) who are classified as "intersex."

Or she may have Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), which affects two to five out of every 100,000 births. The different biological gender classifications are complex, ever changing and, ideally, private. But to the drooling press, it's vulture time.

As Yaniv wrote, "The tests, ordered...after Semenya's 800-meter victory in the World Championships, determined she's a hermaphrodite--having both male and female organs." Now the story has gone international, and Caster Semenya has gone into hiding.

Forget for a moment that the term "hermaphrodite" is as outdated and offensive as "mulatto." Forget that these test results were leaked first to the Australian press, which also referred to Semenya as a hermaphrodite. Forget that Australia was the country that brought these accusations against Semenya in the first place.

Besides being a cruel and idiotic practice, sex testing doesn't account for the idea that gender is at least in part socially constructed and far more fluid than the iron categories of male and female. An 18-year-old woman is being torn apart in the press for doing nothing but winning a race. If it is the goal of the media and IAAF to destroy the life of a young, talented female athlete by outing her as potentially intersex then they are not simply pitiless; they are socially repugnant.

From the notion that women are somehow weaker and slower than men, to the not-so-subtle racism of Western standards of appearance, and on to their profound ignorance about the fluidity of sex and gender, these institutions are threatening to catapult women in sports back into the Dark Ages. We can't let them.

Being a woman--or a man--is not reducible to internal organs or chromosomes. Social, historical, political and economic forces shape who we are and how we perceive our gender identities, in addition to our biology.

We should be enraged by the indifference and crass opportunism at "sexy" headlines. We must demand an end to gender testing in sports as an ill-conceived endeavor that only results in tormenting its subjects and projecting garbage ideas about what men and women really are.

And after all the horror, outrage and ogling from the Daily News and its media brethren, Semenya's condition may very well be allowable under IAAF policy.

As Science of Sport reported, "While it may be suggested that being an intersex individual, or someone who is 'not entirely female,' is grounds for disqualification, it is not. In Atlanta in 1996, eight women 'failed' the sex verification test because they had a Y-chromosome (strictly speaking, they had the SRY gene or the Y-chromosome). All eight were allowed to compete."

Since 2005 eight athletes that we know about have been investigated for "sexuality issues." Of the eight, according to the IAAF secretary general, only four "were asked to stop their career."

Dr. Myron Genel, a professor emeritus of pediatrics at Yale University who was part of a special panel of experts the IAAF convened, said, "She's born a female, raised as a female through puberty. Whatever is found, with the exception of deliberate substance abuse, she's going to have to be allowed to compete as a female."

If Semenya's biology is not "normal," it's worth asking, what world-class athlete does have a normal body?

No one brands Shaquille O'Neal abnormal because he is seven feet tall. Michael Phelps, as was remarked by breathless Olympics commentators, has unusually large and flat feet that act like flippers in a pool. Usain Bolt has a stride that allows him to cover an insane amount of ground in only a few steps.

As Tommy Craggs of Deadspin writes, "Great athletes tend not to come from the vast middle of human life. They're all freaks in one way or another.... But Semenya has nevertheless been portrayed as some lone oddity on the margins, like some Elephant Man of sports, with everyone obsessing like Victorian scientists over the presence of a couple internal testicles. It's funny: People seem to think her very weirdness is grounds enough for stripping her of her medal and drumming her out of track. But this is sports. Her weirdness is perfectly normal."

It's the "her" part that gets Semenya in trouble. Exceptional male athletes are treated like kings, not sideshow freaks. But for women to join them on the royal dais, you must appear as if you can step seamlessly from the court or track and into the pages of soft-core porn. Freaks need not apply.

There are real fears, expressed by Semenya's family, for her mental health in the wake of this maelstrom. We should stand without question in solidarity with Caster Semenya and express nothing but contempt for those who would get off, financially or otherwise, on seeing her destroyed.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090928/zirin_wolf

[GeeBee]

/thread.
:appl:

[QuikTrig]

basically all of your assumptions.

1. You're wrong for denying the claim that training facilities matter more than merely having a penis. This is empirically proven by every female athlete ever that's better at any sport than you. Your replies in this thread on this point are weak at best.

i'm surprised you can call them weak at best when you clearly have not even read them. the article framed it with an inference that we were talking about elite athletes. it is ludicrous to think that when talking about athletes, training facilities and superior nutrition make a bigger difference then fucking gender. you are delusional if you think otherwise. yes, your right that an olympic level woman would beat me at their respective sport. woopdefucking doo. that is not relevant at all. do you realize that MEN'S COLLEGE PRELIMS in track events would be WORLD RECORDS for women. you're telling me that this difference is more attributed to facilities than gender? your a joke.

2. Your claim that differences in gender are biological is also wrong. The differences in biology are so minute that they hardly warrant the differences we see in socially constructed gender. This article calls into question what the fuck being a woman means. If gender is purely biological, i'd like you to explain transexuals to me in a way that isn't completely offensive/homophobic. This position isn't even that controversial. It's widely accepted that gender is socially constructed.
it is hardly "widely accepted" that gender is socially constructed, at least in the way you're insinuating. sure, social perspective affects the dynamic between men and women. "minute differences"? you're framing gender differences within the construct of society. we are talking about fucking sports. i feel like we're arguing two different things here. go ahead and argue for gender equality in the workplace, home, etc. but to be completely BLIND and say that biological differences between men and women play no part in sports performance doesn't make you some high-horse civil rights advocater -- it makes you a dumbass.

3. Your claim that the implications of this article stop at dumbasses like you getting to play women's soccer is completely asinine. This whole article is about gender roles. Male domination is based on the fact that men are "stronger" than women. Your arguments justify said subjugation. You can't say "nah, accept difference", because this difference is what justifies patriarchy. The differences are inherently hierarchical. They involve claims like "women are weaker than men physically", "women are less rational than men", etc. When you're already thinking X is better than Y, you can't claim "nah we'll just accept that X and Y are different", because those differences necessarily entail that line of reasoning. so empirically, women are not weaker than men physically? don't bullshit. just quote this and answer.

YOU are the one who's placing the connotation of PHYSICAL STRENGTH to gender superiority. how the hell is a simple empirical fact suddenly some hierarchical statement deeply rooted in white, male women-hating history. YOU are the one inferring that. take it simply as it's stated. it's not a fucking big deal. the problem isn't that differences exist, because they do. whether you like it or not. i am pointing out the differences, which i personally don't feel matter -- nor they should. to you, it's some sexist remark deeply rooted in america's white male history. whatever floats your boat man. you just go keep fighting the good fight. ive already learned to accept them; the fact that i can easily win a gold medal in womens soccer is enjoyable to me and fun to mention. nothing more.

4. Your claim that "no woman would ever win a sport if men tried to infiltrate it" is also unverifiable, as it's never been tried in a professional way. Even said comparison wouldn't be fair, as there are various factors, such as white male privilege, that would make it harder for a woman to win. Example: the fact that they would be considered sex objects would be an obstacle because many people think large muscles on women are unattractive, yet would be more than cool with similar muscle growth on a man. A lot of women athletes do have to look physically attractive in order to gain acceptance in their sport, and that can impact their performance in certain cases. look at your damn television. play a fucking sport. watch a bodybuilding/fitness competition. the strongest women, who don't give a shit about your "unattractive muscles", can't hold a flame to their male counterparts. it's a physical fucking difference. you are trying to find blame in society and shit when there's nothing there. it's a physical difference -- i don't see what's so damn hard to see about that. unless changing societal attitudes towards will suddenly make ovaries produce profuse amounts of testosterone overnight and their bodies begin to show inhuman muscular synthesis, i have no idea how you're rant about societal gender dynamics changes anything.

It's possible that a woman could functionally beat men in a sport. Hard? Sure, but not impossible. Slight biological advantages can be overcome. People play with injuries and still perform at a high level above uninjured people. People play sick. Once mediocre/terrible athletes suddenly become clutch and step up their game for a brief period of time. Why exactly can't this apply to women?
oh i don't like your sexist tone. so now women are being compared to injured/ill/mediocre/terrible athletes? oh damn! stupid white male privilege. these is why they are not as good as men in sports obviously.:-0

anyway, it would be damn near impossible for an elite woman to be consistently better than a male. try to name one sport where it's even close right now. people that play with injuries that perform at a high level above uninjured people either a) were already more skilled at their sport, or b) playing at a level that they cannot sustain, i.e. an anomaly. yes, people play sick? have you ever played a sport sick? it does not magically make your skill-set disappear. if it does, chances are you shouldn't be playing. as for "clutch" athletes, you explained it yourself. it's a brief period of time -- another anomaly. clutch play is negligible. don't let the outliers -- e.g. jordan -- make you think there's some phenomenon out there where a lot of players are sometimes insanely clutch and normally mediocre. there isn't.

5. Forcing people to prove their identity, regardless of gender, can be damaging to their mental health. We even have posters here claiming she isn't a woman because she's supposedly a hermaphrodite. You try growing up within a specific gender construct only to be told later that you're "not a real man". This bothers a lot of people. Proving identities is inherently accusatory, it implies she cheated when she merely performed in her sport.
and i agreed. it was mishandled, though i blame it more on the media than the committee. i feel sad that she had to go through the humiliation. however, these runners were subject to the rules before they began. these tests were inevitable and she knew they were coming. as a world-class athlete, she had doctors and agents who undoubtedly knew about this before the competition. if you have a problem with gender testing, fine. but as i've said before, it's one of those situations where there's no right answer so i leave the structure of testing up to the sport itself and the people that play it.