For the âbut sport has to be fairâ people, stop. Sport will never be fair, there are always people with better genetics, and with better access to training and equipment and the time to devote to developing their potential, bla bla bla.
The people trying to lawyer about who is or isnât a woman here arenât here to make sport fair, theyâre using the fact youâd like sport to be fair as a way to get you to support their demand to be able to reduce sport into a thing they can pick winners with by disqualifying people on arbitrary standards they get to invent.
I mean, the people that have been insisting âyouâre a woman if you were born with those partsâ are now insisting âyouâre not a woman if I feel like youâre not a womanâ. Your takeaway here is that the pretexts will continue to change in order to get or keep your support, the underlying thrust is they want to discriminate against people that donât fit in to their ideas of what being a woman should mean.
I understand that the allegations are not very specific, but does the IOC do its own testing which would conclusively disprove them? Iâve seen a lot of discussion about the credibility of the accusers (low) and the ethics of transgender participation in sports, but all that discussion would be moot if these boxers are in fact biologically female with no abnormalities.
The IOC does have its own eligibility requirements and does its own testing. The IOC does not test for âgenderâ.
The boxer is not trans. How do I know this? Sheâs from fucking Algeria, sheâd be dead if she was trans, not in the Olympics representing the country.
Who, btw, should never have lost her chance to stay in competition. Her testosterone levels are no more an advantage than Michael Phelps height, wingspan, hand/feet size and his body producing less lactic acid which shortens his recovery time.
Being a champion athlete requires both determination and innate physical advantages. This is in some sense unfair to people who try as hard as the champions do but, through no fault of their own, lack the championsâ physical advantages. Therefore you can argue that since there arenât things like basketball leagues for short people, there shouldnât be separate competitions for men and women either. This is ultimately a matter of opinion, but I expect that you will have a hard time convincing the public. There are separate competitions, and while thatâs the case, it makes no sense to allow a person with the specific set of innate physical advantages that men have over women to compete in the womenâs competition. The whole point of having a womenâs competition is to prevent that.
Caster Semenya is entirely unexceptional by the standards of male runners. For example, she won first place in the Womenâs 800 metres race at the 2009 World Championships with a time of 1:58.66, which would have gotten her 47th place (out of 48) in the menâs heats. She would therefore not even run in the semifinals. The winner of the menâs race had a time of 1:45.29, more than ten seconds less than hers. I donât see the appeal of watching her win only because she is allowed to compete against women with much lower levels of testosterone than she has.
I donât see the appeal of watching her win only because she is allowed to compete against women with much lower levels of testosterone than she has.
Letâs try adding your first argument to your second and see how it sounds.
âI donât see the appeal of watching them win only because they are allowed to compete against people much shorter than they are.â
A genetic predisposition to success in a particular sport is either a problem for all sports or none of them.
If you are arguing that the current categories are what they are then testosterone shouldnât be a factor unless you are positing that testosterone level has a threshold past which you are male.
The whole point of having a womenâs competition is to prevent that.
The whole point of having a womenâs competition is to separate âmenâ from âwomenâ, if the point was to prevent unbalanced categories weâd be basing the categories on things that were important to the perceived integrity of the sport.
You could also argue that historically ( in the west at the very least ) it was partially to stop âwomenâ from competing in âmenâsâ competitions, not because of a difference in physicality but because of a difference in societal expectations.
it makes no sense to allow a person with the specific set of innate physical advantages that men have over women to compete in the womenâs competition.
Again, lets switch the subject of your phrase
âit makes no sense to allow a person with the specific set of innate physical advantages that tall people have over short people to compete in the tall peoples competition.â
This is not a good argument.
As you said the theoretical solution to this is to based the brackets/categories on things other than biological sex, something that can be measured reliably and precisely, but also as you said , good luck convincing the public/advertisers to switch at this point.
You could also argue that historically ( in the west at the very least ) it was partially to stop âwomenâ from competing in âmenâsâ competitions, not because of a difference in physicality but because of a difference in societal expectations.
Or sometimes it was just done to stop women from beating men.
In the 1992 Olympics, a woman won gold in the mixed sex skeet shooting category, beating male competitors.
In 1996 women were barred from the erstwhile mixed event, but did not get a separate category either. Only from the 2000 Olympics a separate womenâs skeet shooting event was established.
Youâre assuming that testosterone levels are the only thing that affects the outcome. It is not. Nor is it the strongest indicator of who will win. Stop being narrow minded and singular in your assessment.
Itâs the biggest factor that affects the outcome when serious athletes compete. The most athletic people with standard female levels of testosterone will be nowhere near as good at most sports as the most athletic people with standard male levels of testosterone. Thatâs why I pointed out that Semenyaâs first place finish in the womenâs race would have been 47th place in the menâs. The fastest women at that competition were about as fast as the slowest men.
How many different sports where the best women are significantly worse than the best men would I have to list before you were convinced? Because itâs almost all sportsâŠ
Science is undecided on whether high testosterone levels give women an edge in sports. Many successful male athletes have comparatively low testosterone levels
Males with the highest testosterone levels were significantly faster in the 20 m (p = 0.033) and 30 m (p = 0.014) sprint trials compared to males with lower testosterone levels.
There is a wide sex difference in circulating testosterone concentrations and a reproducible dose-response relationship between circulating testosterone and muscle mass and strength as well as circulating hemoglobin in both men and women. These dichotomies largely account for the sex differences in muscle mass and strength and circulating hemoglobin levels that result in at least an 8% to 12% ergogenic advantage in men.
Together, these findings indicate that, in female athletes, even normal levels of endogenous androgens are positively correlated to lean mass and physical performance.
This is what I found after looking for just a few minutes. Iâm honestly not sure why Iâm doing this, because the positive effect of testosterone on athletic performance is a well-established fact. Thatâs why some athletes try to cheat by injecting testosterone, and why people with XY chromosomes but total androgen insensitivity develop a female phenotype (although they are infertile). I really have no idea why you think that science is undecided on this topic.
Iâm not saying âtheyâ to avoid specifying gender. Iâm saying âtheyâ because there are two boxers involved in this controversy.
The IBA said Khelif and fellow boxer Lin Yu-ting of Taiwan had failed âto meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors.â
The IBA has not disclosed the nature of the tests conducted on Khelif and Yu-Ting. The results therefore are not conclusive, nor are they reproducible.
There is no context or explanation or proof of legitimacy/illegitimacy that is relevant to this discussion. The right is just excited to have a new attack vector against trans folks that also can be used to attack women writ large. 2 birds 1 bigoted stone.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source