Is this a black and white issue or is it many shades of grey? I suspect it's many shades of grey. Are there not people out there who appear outwardly to be women but have undescended testicles, an enlarged clitoris, no uterus or ovaries and a non-functional vagina? On the other hand, there are others with merely elevated testosterone levels who put on muscle quickly. I would be interested in how far the science has gone in pinpointing the range discovered so far!
1
"He wondered whether someone like Caitlyn Jenner, who won an Olympic gold medal in the decathlon as Bruce Jenner, could now lace up her sneakers to compete as a woman."
I guess they don't teach medical geneticists that track and field competitors don't "lace up sneakers," huh? I ran in track shoes, with spikes, and would guess that most world class athletes (which I certainly was NOT) do the same. Basketball players "lace up sneakers." Not track and field competitors. Stay with the DNA, professor.
I guess they don't teach medical geneticists that track and field competitors don't "lace up sneakers," huh? I ran in track shoes, with spikes, and would guess that most world class athletes (which I certainly was NOT) do the same. Basketball players "lace up sneakers." Not track and field competitors. Stay with the DNA, professor.
1
One thing I'd like to point out, the goal for sport government body is to create a level playing field for participants. A level playing field for practical purposes might not include everyone but as long as most participants agree it is fair, it is fair. South Africa sent Caster Semenya to run as woman and Oscar Pistorius to run as man set a bad example of trying to skirt this principle and this Indian athlete is simply trying to follow their bad example. If everyone running with you think it is not a fair game, it is not a fair game.
5
Should the goal of sport not be to provide an avenue for people to participate in sport?
While you may think you make a fair point, firstly you need to define "level playing field". Please do so, and do so specifically. When you can do that, only then can you move forward with your proposition.
While you may think you make a fair point, firstly you need to define "level playing field". Please do so, and do so specifically. When you can do that, only then can you move forward with your proposition.
3
@Mianne
A level playing field is easy. It is whatever all participants agree is fair. Is being short in a basketball court fair? Not really but as long as everyone agrees it is fair enough they can play ball.
When everyone running with Chand, Semenya and Pistorius think they are competing with someone with an unfair advantage, it is not a fare game.
A level playing field is easy. It is whatever all participants agree is fair. Is being short in a basketball court fair? Not really but as long as everyone agrees it is fair enough they can play ball.
When everyone running with Chand, Semenya and Pistorius think they are competing with someone with an unfair advantage, it is not a fare game.
2
This isnt just about elevated testoserone levels. Men are born with physical advantages over women beyond testoserone, like larger and stronger spines not as prone to fracture along with denser bones and muscles, that do not disappear after sex reassignment surgery. Womens spines are different to accommodate childbirth.
The side effect many seem afraid of is that by allowing anyone to self-identify their gender unchecked could mean transgendered females or simple cross dressers would compete against cisgendered females, which isnt fair for the reasons stated above.
Intersexual women are overrepresented in elite sports. Thats a fact so theres def something to them having greater athletic abilities but weather its unfair needs studying. Since this only affects the historically marginalized half of the population and not male sports, I suspect men in power dont care much about it.
Women had to fight the patriarchy to compete in sports at all and there still exists many men who would be glad to see it taken away.
If physiological differences dont matter then why do we have separate events for men and women at all? Thats where this is going. Nevermind that women would never place in a sporting event again. But thats okay.. women should be used to losing to men by now, right?
The side effect many seem afraid of is that by allowing anyone to self-identify their gender unchecked could mean transgendered females or simple cross dressers would compete against cisgendered females, which isnt fair for the reasons stated above.
Intersexual women are overrepresented in elite sports. Thats a fact so theres def something to them having greater athletic abilities but weather its unfair needs studying. Since this only affects the historically marginalized half of the population and not male sports, I suspect men in power dont care much about it.
Women had to fight the patriarchy to compete in sports at all and there still exists many men who would be glad to see it taken away.
If physiological differences dont matter then why do we have separate events for men and women at all? Thats where this is going. Nevermind that women would never place in a sporting event again. But thats okay.. women should be used to losing to men by now, right?
7
Testosterone is a continuous variable, while gender, for the purpose of sports, is categorical; there is no cut-off that can rationalize the two. Consider whether a man with low testosterone would be told by the authorities to take testosterone in order to compete as a man.
5
The author clearly favors Chand participating. She then raises the big question without any further probing. If any self identifying female can compete, what prevents the takeover of many women's sporting events by those considered males at birth? Ms. Macur mentions the Jenner saga but fails to state whether she believes Caitlyn should compete under which gender (?) classification.
6
That's a philosophical question only, and one that doesn't really carry much credibility. I became the first [known] transitioned woman (assigned male at birth) to compete on professional golf tours in 2004. Some stats for you: tournaments wins: 0 ...number of additional transitioned women competing on *any* tour between then and 2015: 0
May I suggest: If medical investigations reveal high levels of testosterone and the presence of testes then it is not reasonable to compete as a woman.
9
Stephen, your suggestion just stubbornly refuses all of the scientific and ethical arguments that have been advanced about why that's problematic. I suggest you read the CAS decision, which you can find here: http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/award_internet.pdf
13
How about using the Y chromosome as a discriminator?
Endorphinut - that was tried, but it doesn't work: there are women with Y chromosomes (look into the history of sex testing in sport, and you'll start to get a better sense of the complex biology of sex).
10
This article completely misses the point of the ruling – which was not more handwringing about "now what? where will we draw the line between men and women?” CAS points out that the policy never did draw the line between men and women, but created two categories of women (those eligible to compete and those ineligible by virtue of their natural biology).
As Katrina Karkazis eloquently said in an interview today, the women’s eligibility policy was always a solution in search of a problem. First policymakers said it was about keeping men from infiltrating women's events, but decades of looking never found any would-be imposters. Next, it was about 'superwomen' who would dominate everything because of their high T. Now CAS has called on the IAAF to show the proof that the contribution of high T to athletic performance is as high as the policy suggests - i.e., that it approaches the advantage that men have over women in average strength & speed. Eric Vilain – a scientist - is upset that IAAF should have to show cause and effect. It “doesn’t compute” to him, because so many things contribute to athletic performance. (That’s exactly the point.) So he drags up another boogyman: transwomen. Caitlyn Jenner could just pull on a pair of high heels and walk into a women's swim meet. The last thing we need is to add transphobia into the mix, people. (P.s. There's already a policy that covers trans athletes.) This is nothing but a gender panic.
As Katrina Karkazis eloquently said in an interview today, the women’s eligibility policy was always a solution in search of a problem. First policymakers said it was about keeping men from infiltrating women's events, but decades of looking never found any would-be imposters. Next, it was about 'superwomen' who would dominate everything because of their high T. Now CAS has called on the IAAF to show the proof that the contribution of high T to athletic performance is as high as the policy suggests - i.e., that it approaches the advantage that men have over women in average strength & speed. Eric Vilain – a scientist - is upset that IAAF should have to show cause and effect. It “doesn’t compute” to him, because so many things contribute to athletic performance. (That’s exactly the point.) So he drags up another boogyman: transwomen. Caitlyn Jenner could just pull on a pair of high heels and walk into a women's swim meet. The last thing we need is to add transphobia into the mix, people. (P.s. There's already a policy that covers trans athletes.) This is nothing but a gender panic.
22
There are more intersexuals represented in elite (womens) sports than are found in the general population. Clearly there is some kind of advantage.
11
Well, the so called policy ("Stockholm Consensus") that covers transitioned athletes, is actually a woefully poor document and nor is it based on any medical fact what so ever (nor does it accommodate, or even attempt to accommodate, transitioned men). It was arrived at by popular vote by the IOC medical commission. Speaks very loudly of the mindset behind the creation of such 'policies' in the first place. At the root of all of this, is a "society problem"
If the powers that be do not want to allow people an "unfair advantage" based on their individual physiological parameters, then I suggest they ban everyone over 5'9" from playing basketball, anyone over 140 pounds from track and field, etc. etc. etc.
Every athlete who is successful at the elite levels has multiple physiological parameters that way beyond average. The job of the overseers of sport should be to ensure that people compete with whatever natural gifts they happen to manifest, not to decide that the natural levels of one hormone are the be-all and end-all. Are they testing male athletes for atypically high levels of testosterone? Should male athletes with "normal" levels of testosterone not have men with naturally high levels of testosterone competeing against them.
IAAF is crazy dead wrong on this issue.
Every athlete who is successful at the elite levels has multiple physiological parameters that way beyond average. The job of the overseers of sport should be to ensure that people compete with whatever natural gifts they happen to manifest, not to decide that the natural levels of one hormone are the be-all and end-all. Are they testing male athletes for atypically high levels of testosterone? Should male athletes with "normal" levels of testosterone not have men with naturally high levels of testosterone competeing against them.
IAAF is crazy dead wrong on this issue.
6
Over 140 pounds? Many sports have weight categories.
Over 5'9"? Basketball doesn't have height categories. But it divided in men's and women's.
The same with track and field.
Athletes must be legit for the categories of their sport.
Over 5'9"? Basketball doesn't have height categories. But it divided in men's and women's.
The same with track and field.
Athletes must be legit for the categories of their sport.
3
The Times' effort to insert transgenderism into stories where it doesn't belong is reaching absurd heights. There is no "blurred line" between male and female athletes, at least not in this situation. Having a higher level of testosterone than most women doesn't bring her any closer to being a man than a woman with lower levels of testosterone. She's a woman with high testosterone levels, that's all. If she's not doping then lucky her! She has a natural advantage, the same as someone with more short twitch muscles has an advantage. Or a really tall guy who plays basketball. Sport governing bodies have no business trying to regulate a person's natural chemistry.
9
If "Sport governing bodies have no business trying to regulate a person's natural chemistry" why they don't allow fights between boxers of very different weight?
2
No, its not that simple. She also has testes. She has some male parts but identifies as a woman.
3
It's remarkable that there seems to be no mention of Renee Richards here. In her day her case was viewed as simply a one off and she herself not taken seriously. We seem since to have severed, or be in the process of severing, most connection between gender identity and genetic sexual identity. Good or bad or indifferent, the ramifications of that step will be complicated. What becomes, for example, of the years (and years and years) of expansion of Title IX rights for women in college athletics if one's gender identity rather than genetics or physiology determine one's cohort for competition? We live in a society in which success is one of the most, perhaps the most, prized thing and it's not too far-fetched to imagine men recasting their gender identities if doing so cleared a path to a world or Olympic championship. Or perhaps this is only a faux concern since, by fiat, men and women are equally able in all endeavors.
2
There is no mention of Renee Richards because the Court of Arbitration's decision focused on a specific question: was it reasonable for the IAAF to demand that women athletes with naturally-occurring higher levels of testosterone submit to mandatory surgical and/or pharmacological intervention, as a condition of continued competition? The Court's decision was 'no', since there is little evidence to support this requirement. Their decision was not about trans athletes, merging men's and women's athletic competition, or anything else. The Court gave the IAAF 2 years to produce some evidence. It is notable that this policy was imposed on athletes without persuasive empirical evidence.
3
Santhi Soundarajan, an Indian, won a silver medal in the women's 800m race at the 2006 Asian Games held in Doha, Qatar. This was three years before the Caster Semenya experience who received ample support from her South African government, Sports Authorities and international organization and communities.
Sounderajan’s medal was withdrawn after she was asked to undergo “sex test” which indicated that she did not “possess the sexual characteristics of a woman". She did not get any support from Indian Authorities: she was banned from competing by the Indian Olympic Association under the advice of International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF). She suffered opprobrium and humiliation, and later, depression which led her to attempt to commit suicide. She had to live quite a deplorable life, despite which she tried to help others through her support.
Sounderajan’s medal was withdrawn after she was asked to undergo “sex test” which indicated that she did not “possess the sexual characteristics of a woman". She did not get any support from Indian Authorities: she was banned from competing by the Indian Olympic Association under the advice of International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF). She suffered opprobrium and humiliation, and later, depression which led her to attempt to commit suicide. She had to live quite a deplorable life, despite which she tried to help others through her support.
6