Caster Semenya should not be subject to testes

[laca]

*sigh*

As I said, pig ignorance.

Chromosomes are neither as simplistic, nor as straightforward as you have made it out. What did you do, make a Punnett Square of XY and XX, and then assume you've got it all figured out? Oh, of course, make a Punnett Square! XX and XY, no others need apply! Genetics can be figured out with a square I can show a 12 year old! Damn fools spending thousands of dollars getting degrees in this stuff, what a bunch of stoned wankers.

Too bad genetics doesn't quite work that way. Y genes are not necessary to be male. All you have to have is one X gene. XO is... drumroll... Female. One X chromsome. XXY? XYY? XXYY?

Oh, wait, this is the very tip of the iceburg. I'm sure you can use your incredible ignorance to assign a gender to all of those.

But how about XX/XY? Mosaics. Yes, genetics is not even as straightforward as you having a single set of genes. Mosaics occur in early development, and result in an individual with both XX and XY parts of the body.

Oh, I'm sorry, they're XY. They're male. I remember. I mean nevermind the fact that the individual is a woman who can have kids. She has an XY right arm. Sure, there's no glands in the right arm. Sure, it basically has absolutely no influence on the woman whatsoever. But, XY! She's definitely got XY genes. Male.

It gets even more complicated then this. I haven't even SAID the word Chimera yet (I just did. It makes life more complex. Lets leave it be, because you're ignorant enough already, that'll just get you confused).

The International Olympic Committee convened a group of biologists and scientists to discuss this. They reached the conclusion that there is no standard or sets of standards that define a gender.

But I know! You're smarter than all those scientists, have more expertise in biology, and more knowledge! That's why you know the earth was created 6,000 years... err... you can define gender!

Pig ignorance. It's not a virtue.

Wow! Just wow! Thank you for that.

Of course there is a standard test to define a gender. XY is male, XX is female. The rest is neither. For the purposes of competition, they have to be "assigned" as being either male or female by the competent authority based on individual tests. Which is exactly what's happening with Semenya. Scientists are doing those tests.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

A person with XY chromosomes is a male.

A male that's been castrated and emasculated is still a male - albeit a mutilated male.

A male with man-boobs ("Moobs") is still a male.

A male that willfully undergoes cosmetic surgury is still a male.

A male that willfully undergoes cosmetic surgury to remove his penis and testicals, has a vagina constructed in their place, and undergoes hormonal therapy or cosmetic surgury to acquire a pair of prominent breasts is still a male, no matter what he wants people to believe.

It's like I told one of my more pervy friends, "That ain't a chick with a d**k, that's a guy with t**s!"

*sigh*

As I said, pig ignorance.
·
·
·
Pig ignorance. It's not a virtue.

Fnord has it right for 99% of all persons.

If you have an XY chromosome pattern, and were born with a penis and testicles, and all the other standard “male equipment”, then you are male.

If you have an XX chromosome pattern, and were born with a vagina, uterus, and ovaries, and all the other standard “female equipment”, then you are female.

There are exceptions, of course. According to the WikiPedia article on “Intersexuality”, these exceptions occur at a rate of anywhere from 0.1% to 1.7% of the population.

In any event, I agree with you. “Pig ignorance” is not a virtue. Denying a simple, obvious biological fact, simply on the basis of the rare exceptions to that fact, certainly counts as “pig ignorance”.

 

[Fnord]

Fnord has it right for 99% of all persons ... Denying a simple, obvious biological fact, simply on the basis of the rare exceptions to that fact, certainly counts as “pig ignorance”.

.
Thank you for your support.

99% of the population is either "Male" (XY) or "Female" (XX). The rest are genetic aberrations or anomalies, or they are wilfully trying to pass for something they are not.

 

[GreyICE]

Fnord has it right for 99% of all persons.

If you have an XY chromosome pattern, and were born with a penis and testicles, and all the other standard “male equipment”, then you are male.

If you have an XX chromosome pattern, and were born with a vagina, uterus, and ovaries, and all the other standard “female equipment”, then you are female.

There are exceptions, of course. According to the WikiPedia article on “Intersexuality”, these exceptions occur at a rate of anywhere from 0.1% to 1.7% of the population.

In any event, I agree with you. “Pig ignorance” is not a virtue. Denying a simple, obvious biological fact, simply on the basis of the rare exceptions to that fact, certainly counts as “pig ignorance”.

.
Thank you for your support.

99% of the population is either "Male" (XY) or "Female" (XX). The rest are genetic aberrations or anomalies, or they are wilfully trying to pass for something they are not.

I am sorry that you're so ignorant that you think you can scientifically define something by a rule of thumb.

Gender is neither as simple nor as straightforward as you make it out to be. The fact that your rule works, if you have fuzzy vision and don't pay much attention doesn't mean it actually works. It certainly doesn't mean it works well enough to be used for anything serious. It's rather like the assumption that people with high BMIs are fat. It works great! If you ignore body builders, and athletes, and the weird corner cases with bodytypes and... uh oh...

Rules of thumb are not meant to be anything more than that.

You have upgraded from Argument from Ignorance, to Argument from Deliberate Ignorance (the difference being the first states the premise is true because it hasn't been proven false, the second states the premise is true because you've ignored any evidence that shows it false).

 

[Xulld]

Any event should be able to have any rules it wants for whatever reasons it deems important.

Myself I would have a completely gender open competition and see how that works out for each and every sport. I have a suspicion that many people would be surprised at the outcome.

 

[timhau]

Myself I would have a completely gender open competition and see how that works out for each and every sport. I have a suspicion that many people would be surprised at the outcome.

Surprised in what way?

 

[WildCat]

Surprised in what way?

I'm guessing the surprise would be militant feminists demanding women-only competition.

 

[timhau]

I'm guessing the surprise would be militant feminists demanding women-only competition.

Or alternatively, we'll get Harrison Bergeron sports.

 

[gtc]

That was clearly not a fair competition then.

It was fair actually. It was a team based competition, I won a couple of matches by default and the rest of the team won enough matches that we were runners up in the overall competition.

The competition itself was the fourth division of league only open to employees of financial institutions in the downtown area.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The competition itself was the fourth division of league only open to employees of financial institutions in the downtown area.

Cue strawman from ponderingturtle disputing the fairness of excluding employees of uptown legal practices from this tournament.

Dave

 

[Rolfe]

Well, that was interesting. I looked up from the TV to see what was obviously a women's track race in progress, nearing the end. I thought, "what? there's a man running there along with all these women!"

Then I saw the name on the athlete's chest.

Just an observation.

Rolfe.

 

[Arisia]

After numerous tests through the years she was cleared to compete in the Women's 800m by the governing body of her sport (IAAF) and the governing body of the contest (IOC). That pretty much takes care of it for me, since they're the ones who actually know the results of the testing, and they have still decided she is eligible to compete in women's track events. So good on her for holding up under the pressure!

 

[Damien Evans]

After numerous tests through the years she was cleared to compete in the Women's 800m by the governing body of her sport (IAAF) and the governing body of the contest (IOC). That pretty much takes care of it for me, since they're the ones who actually know the results of the testing, and they have still decided she is eligible to compete in women's track events. So good on her for holding up under the pressure!

And a slap to them for handling the whole thing so terribly.

 

[Rolfe]

After numerous tests through the years she was cleared to compete in the Women's 800m by the governing body of her sport (IAAF) and the governing body of the contest (IOC). That pretty much takes care of it for me, since they're the ones who actually know the results of the testing, and they have still decided she is eligible to compete in women's track events. So good on her for holding up under the pressure!

Yes, I know. I do agree with you really.

I was just so struck by my reaction to glancing at the TV as that race was nearing the finish. I'd forgotten all about Caster Semenya. I hadn't heard any report that she was competing in the Olympics. The entire affair was buried in the mist of a three-year-old debate. She just wasn't on my radar.

Then I looked up from my computer as the roar of the crowd indicated that a race was in its finishing stages, and just thought, immediately, "what on earth is a man doing in a women's race?"

It wasn't until the race was over and the camera focussed on the winner catching her breath, and I saw the name on her shirt, that I remembered this debate.

Rolfe.

 

[AlBell]

I'll wait until there is a serious post on this matter before responding.

Re thread title: testes is the question.

 

[Aepervius]

I can see your point, but a top-class female athlete must have physiological advantages over other women too. Where do you draw the line? When do those advantages become unfair?

When the capacity of the atheletes is so far out of whack compared to its pair competiting that it is way otuside of the expected gaussian of capacity. And frankly you should compete in the group to which your homon measurement say you belong to (in this case men) not the group you *think* you belong to. It is not about psychological gender or whatnot, it is about raw physical competition.

That remind of the the east german swimmer team...

3 year old post

 

[Rolfe]

She got the silver, coming from nowhere. In fact, coming pretty much from the back. I think she lost the gold on tactics. She was so far back when the Russian girl broke, she didn't see it happen as far as I can tell, and left her own final sprint too late. The rest of the girls pretty much handed it to the Russian just on tactics, but Semenya in particular as that finish suggested she could have run down the Russian if she's just started doing it sooner.

Rolfe.

 

[Beerina]

 

[JJM 777]

She got the silver, coming from nowhere. In fact, coming pretty much from the back. I think she lost the gold on tactics.

He she that one looked very strong in the end, but sprinted for more than 100 m, and one must know how long one can safely sprint, one probably had a mark where one will start the sprint no matter what.

Was beautiful to see a white sexy female person win a running competition. It is becoming a tad rare nowadays.

 

[Rolfe]

He she that one looked very strong in the end, but sprinted for more than 100 m, and one must know how long one can safely sprint, one probably had a mark where one will start the sprint no matter what.

My point exactly. She allowed herself to fall too far behind, so that even the strong finishing sprint wasn't enough to do it.

Some BBC commentators at the end speculated she'd done on purpose to avoid the tongue-wagging that would happen if she got the gold, but I don't really think so. She's done all that and she's been approved as a bona fide competitor. I think she just misjudged the earlier pace.

Rolfe.