Please be respectful of Semenya when you post in this thread. Whether you agree or disagree with the idea that she should be allowed to compete in women's sports, please realize she is a human who might read what you are writing.
Given the sensitive nature of this topic, we are requiring registration to post. Registration is free and you can still remain anonymous, but it cuts down on troll posts.
Um. According to hormonereplacementtherapyla.com, most androgen receptors are in the shoulders, chest and neck. It's not nonsense. I understand that Semenya competing or having competed is not palatable for all, but using definite and sweepingly negatory terms like "nonsense" doesn't assist with a proper dialogue, especially when there is information out there that validates the previous post to make sense in a real-life matrix.
Well if the website of "Hormone Replacement Therapy LA"- a company peddling "Top-Tier Hormone Replacement Therapy With Cutting Edge Technology!" - makes a claim, then gee-whiz it must be true.
After all, the website says: "We here at Hormone Replacement Therapy LA aim to make people’s lives better by providing top-notch hormone replacement therapy to diminish lingering ailments. With over a decade of experience in hormone replacement therapy, integrative medicine, and anti-aging medicine we offer the LA residents a better quality of life option."
Your contention that "most androgen receptors are in the shoulders, chest and neck" is balderdash.
In humans and other mammals, androgen receptors or ARs are found in a diverse range of cells, tissues and organs throughout the body such as the testes, penis, prostate, seminal vesicles, female reproductive tract, skin, bone, muscles, fat, brain, cardiovascular system.
However, the number, location, function and behavior of ARs is different in males and females.
AR activity is determined by the AR gene, which is located on the X chromosome.
I realize that USA's National Library of Medicine doesn't hold a candle to Hormone Replacement Therapy LA when it comes to being a source of trustworthy information about medicine and science, but just for shxts and giggles, here's what the NLM website says:
The AR gene provides instructions for making a protein called an androgen receptor. Androgens are hormones (such as testosterone) that are important for normal male sexual development before birth and during puberty. Androgen receptors allow the body to respond appropriately to these hormones.
The receptors are present in many of the body's tissues, where they attach (bind) to androgens. The resulting androgen-receptor complex then binds to DNA and regulates the activity of androgen-responsive genes. By turning the genes on or off as necessary, the androgen receptor helps direct the development of male sexual characteristics. Androgens and androgen receptors also have other important functions in both males and females, such as regulating hair growth and sex drive.
Ok. I'm not sure what the opportunity cost to you with Semenya competing but you're far too brash to be taken credibly. I educated myself by looking up several different sources that address androgen receptors. I know that what that poster said to be true because "traps" or trapezius is addressed as a region with a high concentration of receptors.
I believe the science and the adjudications that went with it. I am legitimizing Semenya because of these findings.
But I won't discuss this with you with this automatically negative bias
So the author / ex-journalism professor has to his credit responded to my tweet, alberit with a sarcastic reply and several others. Of course even after I pressed him about why he didn't mention she's XY, he's been unable to come up with an answer, deflecting about a bunch of non-sense as to how he linked to the definition of DSD.
The reason why this is journalistic malpractice is Time is supposed to be an objective, neutral forum. They left out a KEY fact about Semenya apparently on purpose as it would lead most people towards a conclusion they don't like. That's not neutral journalism - that's advocacy.
Plus when he link to defs of DSD, the average reader (hell even myself), has no idea which definition applies to Semenya. If you click on the link, he linked to it, talks about XX people, XY people, etc. So the reader would have no idea which applied to Semenya but the one they most likely read was XX as sit comes first.
For the record, PJ Vazel has pointed out that WA called the tests gender verification tests.
If you don't support advocacy then stop throwing right-wing viewpoints as if they are truth and stop full enabling of bigotry.
Be the change you want to see in the world, Robert.
What you dislike in the Time reporter is what we see in you and what you call journalism.
Are we going to pretend about "ofa lon teh?" Do you think it didn't affect other supporters of Ms. Houlihan?
And I have no skin in the Houlihan game nor most of the aforementioned... but I have been an avid running fan for decades.
I have a challenge for you, Mr. Robert Johnson...glean from his errors...reflect on who you are and what you do. Change your approach and you'll be what he isn't.
How she looks in a swimsuit is, to the average person, somewhat at odds with her claim to be a "woman".
for me it's a big leery wink that at a stroke negates all the "raised as a girl"/"thought I was a girl" nonsense. this is a photo in CS's own book, ie it's one she chose/one of her favourites. taken on a school trip so presumably by a teacher. I know it was nearly 20 years ago and in Africa but on what planet does a teacher, who in the course of their work has presumably come into contact with hundreds/thousands of 15 girls, see someone with this kind of physique and who chooses to dress like this and think that this is a girl in any meaningful sense, either psychically or socially?
No, we can't "just wash differences away" - and for that reason we can't ignore the effect of biological males competing in women's sports. That isn't "dehumanizing" anyone; it is ensuring women's sport remains a protected category.
Certainly. And we can do that moving forward. However, Semenya was legally allowed to compete when she did so technically and legally there was nothing wrong in competing.
We can both learn from this and also avoid castigating Semenya. Semenya owes no debt to those whom she beat because she legally beat them.
That isn't the argument. Semenya claims to be the victim of injustice. She isn't. She is a regrettable casualty of a necessary sporting principle, that women's sport has to remain a protected category or there is injustice against biological women.
This is gibberish that shows you don't have even a rudimentary understanding of the issues under discussion here.
Contrary to what you claim, genitalia are not the criteria which scientifically determine a person's sex.
Having genitalia that is ambiguous - or looks ambiguous at first glance - does not mean a person's genetic sex is ambiguous, either.
In fact, most DSDs occur in people whose chromosomal and genetic sex is 100% clear and unambigous. This is true even in the case of the few DSDs that most commonly cause people to develop genitalia that looks ambiguous. Such as classic congenital adrenal hyperplasia or CAH - a condition that is a DSD only in females, nearly all of whom are unambiguously 46,XX.
Semenya's DSD is due to an enzyme deficiency - 5-ARD2 - that occurs with the same frequency in both sexes, but which only affects the fetal sex development of males. This enzyme defiency makes it impossible to convert T into its more potent form, DHT.
In human fetuses, DHT is necessary for two parts of male sex anatomy - the penis and the prostate - to develop properly. Thus, male babies with 5-ARD come into the world with underdeveloped prostates and with penises that are maformed, minuscule or missing entirely. Sometimes the penis has grown inwards, creating a shallow indented dimple or pouch that gets mistaken for a vaginal opening.
Male babies with 5-ARD often come into the world with undescended testes too. As a result, their ball sacs are empty and their scrotums appear flattened or deflated, like miniature basketballs with the air taken out. Sometimes the appearance of the empty scrotal sac causes people to mistake it for labia (fused labia, typically).
If Semenya were female, Semenya's 5-ARD2 would have had no impact at all on Semenya's sex development prior to birth or at any other time in life.
5-ARD2 is caused by a mutation of a gene on chromosome 2, which is an autosome (meaning not a sex chromosome). So far, all the people known to have a DSD and atypical or ambiguous genitalia due to 5-ARD2 have been found to have the standard male sex chromosome pattern - 46,XY - and the male-determining SRY gene.
Everyone with Semenya's DSD has male DNA in every nucleated cell in their bodies and fully developed male gonads - testes, not ovaries. The testes of persons with Semenya's male-only DSD produce massive amounts of testosterone, resulting in circulating T levels that are either in the normal adult male range or exceed it.
What's more, everyone with Semenya's male-only DSD has male androgen receptors in good working order. Thus their bodies use the massive amount of T their testes pump out as males typically and normally do. They've all been through male mini puberty of infancy and male puberty of adolescence. In the process, they've obtained all the physical features that give males as a group such enormous advantages over females as a group in nearly all sports.
People with Semenya's male-only DSD often have fertility problems due to the unusual location of their testes and underdevelopment of their prostates and seminal vesicles. But none of them have any female organs at all. If persons with Semenya's male-only DSD are able to have bioligical children - as many have done, and many can do with medical assistance - it's because the gametes their male gonads make are male ones, namely sperm.
What I know in a nutshell is that she competed and won and complied with the tests... legally.
I'm okay with the fact that she legally won based on the rules at the time.
And for me, that's really that.
The rules have been changed because the sport has recognised her participation and of those like her was unfair to women.
for me it's a big leery wink that at a stroke negates all the "raised as a girl"/"thought I was a girl" nonsense. this is a photo in CS's own book, ie it's one she chose/one of her favourites. taken on a school trip so presumably by a teacher. I know it was nearly 20 years ago and in Africa but on what planet does a teacher, who in the course of their work has presumably come into contact with hundreds/thousands of 15 girls, see someone with this kind of physique and who chooses to dress like this and think that this is a girl in any meaningful sense, either psychically or socially?
So someone's physical appearance matters when the person does not look like a woman. But it does not matter when the person looks like a woman?
Does "looking like a woman" a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for being a woman? Or can someone be a woman without looking like a woman?
You're a casuist, trying to use every little twist and turn to evade a simple point. Semenya maintains she is a woman but quite apart from the chromosomal and other evidence she isn't, her physical development - as shown by the picture of her in a swimsuit - cries out that she is a male. The picture doesn't have to be definitive to simply reinforce the point, once again, that Semenya is clearly more male than female.
I might point out in response to that blog that complete androgen insensitivity syndrome has been found amongst some women athletes. They can compete as females under the present rules because they do not have male levels of testosterone. As with the woman above, despite being XY their condition makes them under-masculinized, so they appear female. But that isn't so with Semenya. That isn't her condition. She produces male levels of testosterone.
This is not accurate. A person with CAIS produces male level testosterone. Her body does not get masculinized because she does not have functioning androgen receptor.
I only posted that link because RR cited it to claim "intersex" is a dated term, while the blogger would be completely offended by RR's gamete fundamentalism.
You are wrong about testosterone levels. Athletes with CAIS may produce higher than typical female levels of testosterone but they don't reach male levels, which is why they are able to comply with the IAAF rules.
This is not accurate. A person with CAIS produces male level testosterone. Her body does not get masculinized because she does not have functioning androgen receptor.
I only posted that link because RR cited it to claim "intersex" is a dated term, while the blogger would be completely offended by RR's gamete fundamentalism.
You are wrong about testosterone levels. Athletes with CAIS may produce higher than typical female levels of testosterone but they don't reach male levels, which is why they are able to comply with the IAAF rules.
Sorry, but I think you're the one in error here. Using the reference range WA goes by, the normal range for natural T in males 18 and up is 7.7-29.4 nmol/L. Below are the T ranges found in XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes in three published studies.
As you can see, only some persons with CAIS have natural T levels below the normal male range. Some persons with CAIS have natural T levels of 50-60+ nmol/L, which is much higher than the top of end of the normal male range for natural T in adulthood and adolescence.
One of the reasons that many XY persons with CAIS outwardly look extremely feminized and develop large breasts is that they automatically convert all their testosterone into estrogen through the process of aromatization (all males convert some of their testicular T into E this way). Because many people with XY CAIS who still have their testes produce such unusually high natural T levels to begin with, they end up with extremely high levels of natural estrogen in their systems after converting their T into E.
"Genetic males with CAIS have a blind vagina, no cervix or uterus, and undescended testes which are usually located in the abdomen.28, 34, 40, 41 They have normal foetal male testosterone levels in utero, but ambiguous genitalia, as the impaired androgen receptors do not activate appropriate cellular responses and tissue action. At puberty, testosterone levels increase into the normal adult male range, but there is no tissue response to testosterone and no masculinization. However, the pubertal increase in testosterone causes an increase in estradiol, by aromatization of the testosterone, leading to feminization, with breast development and a near-normal female phenotype. The testes usually remain in the abdomen."
Since testes produce T on a pretty steady basis day after day, week after week, and XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes convert all their T into E, adolescents and adults with CAIS who've kept their testes will always have the same often extremely high amount of E in their systems. Alternatively, persons with XY CAIS who've had their testes removed tend to take unvaryingly high doses of Big Pharma estrogen day after day over the course of adolescence and adulthood. As a result, they tend to very high levels of E on a continual basis too.
This is another reason why so many XY persons with CAIS look so highly feminized. If XY adolescents and adults with CAIS were female with ovaries, they wouldn't have such high estrogen levels in their systems all the time - they'd be subject to the dramatic ups and downs in estrogen (and progesterone) that female adolescents and adults (not on hormonal BC) naturally go through over the course of the 28-day ovulation-menstruation cycle.
If XY CAIS persons were female, they'd also experience the overal decline and eventual disappearance of natural estrogen that all female adults undergo - usually starting in our late 30s or early 40s - as our ovarian function diminishes during peri-menopause, followed by our ovaries finally shutting off altogether during menopause in/by/around our early 50s.
This post was edited 10 minutes after it was posted.
You are wrong about testosterone levels. Athletes with CAIS may produce higher than typical female levels of testosterone but they don't reach male levels, which is why they are able to comply with the IAAF rules.
Sorry, but I think you're the one in error here. Using the reference range WA goes by, the normal range for natural T in males 18 and up is 7.7-29.4 nmol/L. Below are the T ranges found in XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes in three published studies.
As you can see, only some persons with CAIS have natural T levels below the normal male range. Some persons with CAIS have natural T levels of 50-60+ nmol/L, which is much higher than the top of end of the normal male range for natural T in adulthood and adolescence.
One of the reasons that many XY persons with CAIS outwardly look extremely feminized and develop large breasts is that they automatically convert all their testosterone into estrogen through the process of aromatization (all males convert some of their testicular T into E this way). Because many people with XY CAIS who still have their testes produce such unusually high natural T levels to begin with, they end up with extremely high levels of natural estrogen in their systems after converting their T into E.
"Genetic males with CAIS have a blind vagina, no cervix or uterus, and undescended testes which are usually located in the abdomen.28, 34, 40, 41 They have normal foetal male testosterone levels in utero, but ambiguous genitalia, as the impaired androgen receptors do not activate appropriate cellular responses and tissue action. At puberty, testosterone levels increase into the normal adult male range, but there is no tissue response to testosterone and no masculinization. However, the pubertal increase in testosterone causes an increase in estradiol, by aromatization of the testosterone, leading to feminization, with breast development and a near-normal female phenotype. The testes usually remain in the abdomen."
Since testes produce T on a pretty steady basis day after day, week after week, and XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes convert all their T into E, adolescents and adults with CAIS who've kept their testes will always have the same often extremely high amount of E in their systems. Alternatively, persons with XY CAIS who've had their testes removed tend to take unvaryingly high doses of Big Pharma estrogen day after day over the course of adolescence and adulthood. As a result, they tend to very high levels of E on a continual basis too.
This is another reason why so many XY persons with CAIS look so highly feminized. If XY adolescents and adults with CAIS were female with ovaries, they wouldn't have such high estrogen levels in their systems all the time - they'd be subject to the dramatic ups and downs in estrogen (and progesterone) that female adolescents and adults (not on hormonal BC) naturally go through over the course of the 28-day ovulation-menstruation cycle.
If XY CAIS persons were female, they'd also experience the overal decline and eventual disappearance of natural estrogen that all female adults undergo - usually starting in our late 30s or early 40s - as our ovarian function diminishes during peri-menopause, followed by our ovaries finally shutting off altogether during menopause in/by/around our early 50s.
If what you say is correct then you might explain how is it that CAIS athletes can and do compete as women, when the upper limit for testosterone under the rules in the female category is less than the lowest male levels?
Sorry, but I think you're the one in error here. Using the reference range WA goes by, the normal range for natural T in males 18 and up is 7.7-29.4 nmol/L. Below are the T ranges found in XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes in three published studies.
As you can see, only some persons with CAIS have natural T levels below the normal male range. Some persons with CAIS have natural T levels of 50-60+ nmol/L, which is much higher than the top of end of the normal male range for natural T in adulthood and adolescence.
One of the reasons that many XY persons with CAIS outwardly look extremely feminized and develop large breasts is that they automatically convert all their testosterone into estrogen through the process of aromatization (all males convert some of their testicular T into E this way). Because many people with XY CAIS who still have their testes produce such unusually high natural T levels to begin with, they end up with extremely high levels of natural estrogen in their systems after converting their T into E.
"Genetic males with CAIS have a blind vagina, no cervix or uterus, and undescended testes which are usually located in the abdomen.28, 34, 40, 41 They have normal foetal male testosterone levels in utero, but ambiguous genitalia, as the impaired androgen receptors do not activate appropriate cellular responses and tissue action. At puberty, testosterone levels increase into the normal adult male range, but there is no tissue response to testosterone and no masculinization. However, the pubertal increase in testosterone causes an increase in estradiol, by aromatization of the testosterone, leading to feminization, with breast development and a near-normal female phenotype. The testes usually remain in the abdomen."
Since testes produce T on a pretty steady basis day after day, week after week, and XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes convert all their T into E, adolescents and adults with CAIS who've kept their testes will always have the same often extremely high amount of E in their systems. Alternatively, persons with XY CAIS who've had their testes removed tend to take unvaryingly high doses of Big Pharma estrogen day after day over the course of adolescence and adulthood. As a result, they tend to very high levels of E on a continual basis too.
This is another reason why so many XY persons with CAIS look so highly feminized. If XY adolescents and adults with CAIS were female with ovaries, they wouldn't have such high estrogen levels in their systems all the time - they'd be subject to the dramatic ups and downs in estrogen (and progesterone) that female adolescents and adults (not on hormonal BC) naturally go through over the course of the 28-day ovulation-menstruation cycle.
If XY CAIS persons were female, they'd also experience the overal decline and eventual disappearance of natural estrogen that all female adults undergo - usually starting in our late 30s or early 40s - as our ovarian function diminishes during peri-menopause, followed by our ovaries finally shutting off altogether during menopause in/by/around our early 50s.
If what you say is correct then you might explain how is it that CAIS athletes can and do compete as women, when the upper limit for testosterone under the rules in the female category is less than the lowest male levels?
the DSD rules simply don't apply to CAIS individuals, they have a blanket exemption. they can have higher T levels than a 'pumping iron' era Arnold Schwarzenegger without the iaaf batting an eyelid. they're not "relevant athletes" in the terms of the DSD rulebook.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Sorry, but I think you're the one in error here. Using the reference range WA goes by, the normal range for natural T in males 18 and up is 7.7-29.4 nmol/L. Below are the T ranges found in XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes in three published studies.
As you can see, only some persons with CAIS have natural T levels below the normal male range. Some persons with CAIS have natural T levels of 50-60+ nmol/L, which is much higher than the top of end of the normal male range for natural T in adulthood and adolescence.
One of the reasons that many XY persons with CAIS outwardly look extremely feminized and develop large breasts is that they automatically convert all their testosterone into estrogen through the process of aromatization (all males convert some of their testicular T into E this way). Because many people with XY CAIS who still have their testes produce such unusually high natural T levels to begin with, they end up with extremely high levels of natural estrogen in their systems after converting their T into E.
"Genetic males with CAIS have a blind vagina, no cervix or uterus, and undescended testes which are usually located in the abdomen.28, 34, 40, 41 They have normal foetal male testosterone levels in utero, but ambiguous genitalia, as the impaired androgen receptors do not activate appropriate cellular responses and tissue action. At puberty, testosterone levels increase into the normal adult male range, but there is no tissue response to testosterone and no masculinization. However, the pubertal increase in testosterone causes an increase in estradiol, by aromatization of the testosterone, leading to feminization, with breast development and a near-normal female phenotype. The testes usually remain in the abdomen."
Since testes produce T on a pretty steady basis day after day, week after week, and XY persons with CAIS who still have their testes convert all their T into E, adolescents and adults with CAIS who've kept their testes will always have the same often extremely high amount of E in their systems. Alternatively, persons with XY CAIS who've had their testes removed tend to take unvaryingly high doses of Big Pharma estrogen day after day over the course of adolescence and adulthood. As a result, they tend to very high levels of E on a continual basis too.
This is another reason why so many XY persons with CAIS look so highly feminized. If XY adolescents and adults with CAIS were female with ovaries, they wouldn't have such high estrogen levels in their systems all the time - they'd be subject to the dramatic ups and downs in estrogen (and progesterone) that female adolescents and adults (not on hormonal BC) naturally go through over the course of the 28-day ovulation-menstruation cycle.
If XY CAIS persons were female, they'd also experience the overal decline and eventual disappearance of natural estrogen that all female adults undergo - usually starting in our late 30s or early 40s - as our ovarian function diminishes during peri-menopause, followed by our ovaries finally shutting off altogether during menopause in/by/around our early 50s.
If what you say is correct then you might explain how is it that CAIS athletes can and do compete as women, when the upper limit for testosterone under the rules in the female category is less than the lowest male levels?
Because they don't have functioning androgen receptor. Their body does not respond to androgen, hence the name of the medical condition, Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Their body does not masculinize in the way the bodies of people with functioning androgen receptor.
Thanks, i was unaware of Semenya's 5arn2 condition. Do you know Semenya's T levels? From what i've read, hers are triple the value of a typical woman (15-70ng/dl), which would still leave her below the normal male range of 265-923. Though it could be her free T is very high. I'm no longer sure T levels are the best determinant.
Back when Semenya and the IAAF struck a deal that Semenya could compete in the women's category if Semenya took drugs (oral estrogen) to lower Semenya's T, the upper limit set for Semenya's T was 10 nmol/L.
According to the CAS decision in Semenya's court case against the IAAF/WA, even when Semenya was on T-lowering medication, Semenya's T would go above the 10 nmol/L limit.
10 nmol/L is squarely in the normal male range. The reference range that WA uses says males 18 and up normally have natural T levels of 7.7-29.4 nmol/L.
The normal range for natural T in females age 18 and up that WA uses is 0.2-1.68 nmol/L.
In 2014, a paper was published about a study that IAAF and WADA did in 2011 to determine the normal T levels of the world's top athletes in women's track & field. The study tested the blood of 849 elite track & field athletes from 163 different countries who competed in the women's category at the 2011 IAAF World Championships in Daegu, South Korea. Ten of these athletes were either known to be XY DSD or to be doping.
In the 839 track & field athletes competing in the women's category at the 2011 IAAF World Championships who were not known to be either XY DSD or doping at the time, the median level of T was 0.69 nmol/L. Three-quarters of the athletes had T under 0.91 nmol/L.
The four athletes already identified as XY DSD who competed in the women's category at the 2011 World Championships in Daegu were found to have T levels of 15.6–29.3 nmol/L.
Semenya - who came in second in the women's 800 at Daegu and was later awarded the gold when the winner was disqualifed for doping - was one of the four XY DSD athletes tested for the study, but exactly what Semenya's T level was has never been revealed. All we know is that at the Daegu World Championships, Semenya had to have a T level of 15.6 nmol/L at minimum and 29.3 nmol/L at most.
So anyways, I would take what you have read about Semenya's T level being only "triple the value of a typical woman" with a proverbial grain of salt. Like much that has been written and said about and by Semenya over the years, that claim seems to be a load of hooey.
I have to assume the Guardian article was factual, but possibly incomplete. Semenya's levels probably were triple...according to *some* test. However the article doesn't preclude the existence of other tests that showed higher results as you point out**
Thanks for correction on "natural" high T levels being legal in XX woman. Seems like these high T values are still far lower than Semenya's, and most often (always?) transient.
**All these values and info are very inconsistent and hard to find, even your quoted cutoff 10nm/L is different from what i've read: in 2019 IAAF regulated T levels over 5nmol/L requires meds to reduce levels below that for at least 6 months. Do i need a Tor browser and Deep/Dark web to find this info?
It has literally been years since I have logged into letsrun, and am doing so here only because beyond the exact issue of this article, the initial post by Robert is an example of all that is wrong with this site. There is nothing posted in the 4 pages of posts that has not been said in past threads on Semenya, which begs the question as to why Robert felt the need to link this one, with his overwrought claim of journalistic malpractice since it did not specifically state something everyone on this site already knows and most readers in the world are aware, since CS has been in the news for literally years.
So, how many past CS posts have there been? Many, to be sure. And in each one, the same arguments are offered, and once we get past Rojo's anger at the article, the posts here are arguing those exact same issues, not the specifics of the article and how it was presented. No one seems to have issues with the actual article except Rojo and this seems in keeping with the ongoing anti-trans posts that frequent letsrun. So it seems to be an issue of importance to Rojo, who keeps feeding posts onto the discussion board to allow posters to riff on the issue.
Now, what is interesting here is that a few guidelines were made: you cannot badmouth CS on this thread. And for some reason, there are only 4 pages of posts after 2 full days, not the usual 30 or 40 that would pepper a thread on this issue without any guidelines and without a lot of moderation.
And, here is something interesting. Not one person on this thread has referred to Semenya as anything but "her" and "she." It seems that no matter what else you might think or feel, you agree that she is actually a she. No one is being funny and calling her "him" or using any other rhetorical trick to diminish who she is as a person. In other threads, reading about Lia Thompson is distressing, to see the utter disrespect she is shown, for example.
In the end, this is all thunder and lightening, but changes nothing. Nothing said here will change anything, the decisions relating to her and others competing will be made regardless of what anyone here feels, and her past is her past- she played by the rules in place and cannot be faulted for that.
Now, the 4 pages of posts here also show how letsrun can be great- there is an actual discussion taking place here, ad hominem attacks are at a minimum, and some knowledge transfer has occurred. If only it were so across the full breadth of this site.
In the end, I probably should not have posted, but I just get frustrated at this site, where it is so often impossible to have an actual discussion on an issue without the trolls taking it off task. So, Rojo, I know you will disagree. I assume you mean well. But how many times do we need to hear the same argument, ad nauseum? The only real issue you have is that you felt the author left important information out of his article. I've been a journal editor for 45 years. We usually handle that by letters to the editor, not public castigation. You've engaged in a tit-for-tat argument with the writer, when the real issue was to make readers aware of the information you felt they needed. There are better and more effective ways to do that.
It has literally been years since I have logged into letsrun...
Welcome back, i've no idea why this post would have been downvoted. Somedays i wish the up/down vote was removed, or only possible if people provide a cogent reason why. The medium of online forums and anonymity encourages, or is by it's nature, an ad hominem attack - Marshal McLuhan is laughing in his grave.
If what you say is correct then you might explain how is it that CAIS athletes can and do compete as women, when the upper limit for testosterone under the rules in the female category is less than the lowest male levels?
the DSD rules simply don't apply to CAIS individuals, they have a blanket exemption. they can have higher T levels than a 'pumping iron' era Arnold Schwarzenegger without the iaaf batting an eyelid. they're not "relevant athletes" in the terms of the DSD rulebook.
Can you specify the rule that says that? I would be interested to see it.
If what you say is correct then you might explain how is it that CAIS athletes can and do compete as women, when the upper limit for testosterone under the rules in the female category is less than the lowest male levels?
Because they don't have functioning androgen receptor. Their body does not respond to androgen, hence the name of the medical condition, Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Their body does not masculinize in the way the bodies of people with functioning androgen receptor.
I understand the rationale for saying the T- levels rule wouldn't apply to them, if they can't actually make use of their testosterone. I would be interested to know what rule actually says that, as I indicated above.
It has literally been years since I have logged into letsrun, and am doing so here only because beyond the exact issue of this article, the initial post by Robert is an example of all that is wrong with this site. There is nothing posted in the 4 pages of posts that has not been said in past threads on Semenya, which begs the question as to why Robert felt the need to link this one, with his overwrought claim of journalistic malpractice since it did not specifically state something everyone on this site already knows and most readers in the world are aware, since CS has been in the news for literally years.
So, how many past CS posts have there been? Many, to be sure. And in each one, the same arguments are offered, and once we get past Rojo's anger at the article, the posts here are arguing those exact same issues, not the specifics of the article and how it was presented. No one seems to have issues with the actual article except Rojo and this seems in keeping with the ongoing anti-trans posts that frequent letsrun. So it seems to be an issue of importance to Rojo, who keeps feeding posts onto the discussion board to allow posters to riff on the issue.
Now, what is interesting here is that a few guidelines were made: you cannot badmouth CS on this thread. And for some reason, there are only 4 pages of posts after 2 full days, not the usual 30 or 40 that would pepper a thread on this issue without any guidelines and without a lot of moderation.
And, here is something interesting. Not one person on this thread has referred to Semenya as anything but "her" and "she." It seems that no matter what else you might think or feel, you agree that she is actually a she. No one is being funny and calling her "him" or using any other rhetorical trick to diminish who she is as a person. In other threads, reading about Lia Thompson is distressing, to see the utter disrespect she is shown, for example.
In the end, this is all thunder and lightening, but changes nothing. Nothing said here will change anything, the decisions relating to her and others competing will be made regardless of what anyone here feels, and her past is her past- she played by the rules in place and cannot be faulted for that.
Now, the 4 pages of posts here also show how letsrun can be great- there is an actual discussion taking place here, ad hominem attacks are at a minimum, and some knowledge transfer has occurred. If only it were so across the full breadth of this site.
In the end, I probably should not have posted, but I just get frustrated at this site, where it is so often impossible to have an actual discussion on an issue without the trolls taking it off task. So, Rojo, I know you will disagree. I assume you mean well. But how many times do we need to hear the same argument, ad nauseum? The only real issue you have is that you felt the author left important information out of his article. I've been a journal editor for 45 years. We usually handle that by letters to the editor, not public castigation. You've engaged in a tit-for-tat argument with the writer, when the real issue was to make readers aware of the information you felt they needed. There are better and more effective ways to do that.
I would respond to one particular point you have made. Referring to Semenya as "she" or "her" is a courtesy; it isn't an acknowledgement that she is biologically female. I refer to her as "she" but my understanding is that she is essentially biologically male, which is why her participation, and of those like her, in female sports is an issue.
This post was edited 50 seconds after it was posted.
Even as a courtesy, you are doing more than many posters on this site would do. There is a lot of deadnaming and refusal to refer to trans athletes as they wish to be referred to. I think you understand this.
the DSD rules simply don't apply to CAIS individuals, they have a blanket exemption. they can have higher T levels than a 'pumping iron' era Arnold Schwarzenegger without the iaaf batting an eyelid. they're not "relevant athletes" in the terms of the DSD rulebook.
Can you specify the rule that says that? I would be interested to see it.
well right at the beginning they say that the DSD rules in their entirety only apply to someone who is a "relevant athlete", defined as follows. CAIS means minimal androgen sensitivity, so 3.1.3 explicitly rules them out:
3.1 A "Relevant Athlete" is an Athlete who meets each of the following three criteria: 3.1.1 they have one of the following DSDs: 3.1.1.1 5α-reductase type 2 deficiency; 3.1.1.2 partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (aka PAIS); 3.1.1.3 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 3 (17β-HSD3) deficiency; 3.1.1.4 ovotesticular DSD; or 3.1.1.5 any other genetic disorder involving disordered gonadal steroidogenesis; and 3.1.2 as a result, they have a concentration of testosterone of 2.5 nmol/L or more in their serum; and 3.1.3 they have sufficient androgen sensitivity for that testosterone to have a material androgenising effect.
Even as a courtesy, you are doing more than many posters on this site would do. There is a lot of deadnaming and refusal to refer to trans athletes as they wish to be referred to. I think you understand this.
As the PP says, it's a very basic courtesy and one that I'd hope most people would extent to any male-bodied person who was even vaguely plausibly claiming to identify as female.
On this thread I don't think that the courtesy is being offered to spare CS's feelings. Quite apart from the chance that she personally will read these words being vanishingly small, there's ample evidence to suggest that CS's gender identity, off-track, tallies perfectly well with the her biological sex, namely male and that she'd be pleased at being identified as male provided that it didn't impact her earnings potential from athletics [originally as a competitor, I guess now as an affiliated 'public figure']. Rather, it's a courtesy largely aimed at a hypothetical reader who suffers from genuine gender dysphoria and who might infer from people using male pronouns to refer to CS that the reader's own gender identify wouldn't ever be taken seriously.
This post was edited 42 seconds after it was posted.