Oops, Mboma may become a problem for IAAF

Great research.

Thank you.

EuroVisionary wrote:

Williamson wrote:

Of course. Mboma would have been identified at a young age in a country with a more advanced healthcare system. I don't think it is fair to criticize Namibia for its lack of medical resources.

No, if Mboma was American she'd be heralded on here as the next great American sprinter.

She's Namibian so she's a "man" and a cheat. You people are f***ing disgusting.

Yup.

It's all based on an ideal for women that was created by/for white women to advantage a protected status in society.

Read

White Tears/Brown Scars by Ruby Hamad.

TrumpSucks wrote:

You know who sucks? Trump.

That functionally illiterate buffoon sucks big time. That's however another discussion for another day.

congothed wrote:

There is one thing we can be sure of. She is one of the clean athletes at the games

/\

This.

None needs to be done on Athing Mu. Athing is not running other worldly times. You also have evidence of Mu's progression from when she was 10 years old. Come on now. Let's not talk apples and oranges here.

Jerry Maguire wrote:

khcglhc wrote:

What I can say is that I will be watching that 200m final. I am sure that I will not be alone.

Can’t wait to see how much progress she makes in the next race (and over balance of the season). If Thompson doesn’t break the WR, maybe Mboma will. Anyway, until then, she is crushing the WJR.

I actually stopped watching the women 800m after Caster was banned. It was just not very interesting to look at women trying to break 2min. I started again this winter when Mu started to run well. Since then, I only watch the 800m women races where Mu runs. She made it exciting again.

Look at this idiot.

Not sure why I’m an idiot, but sure..,

I watched the women 200m. What a race! Congratulations to Thompson. Mboma had another great race. New WJR. I can’t wait to see how low that WJR will go.

Mu’s race was also wonderful. Her time is 23rd all time. So we are getting back to the Melinte, Quirot, Mutola, Ceplak, Caster days.,, Not quite the Kratochvilova and Olizarenko days yet, but after a couple of down years, the women 800m is an exciting race once again.

Two very good events to look at now.

Fogrunr wrote:

congothed wrote:

There is one thing we can be sure of. She is one of the clean athletes at the games

/\

This.

Given that taking T-shots is banned because of the advantage it provides, having excessive amounts cannot make you clean in any shape or form. Given that excessive amounts are produces by balls, that makes you beyond dirty. A whole other universe of what the hell!

EuroVisionary wrote:

100% If Mboma was American, this wouldn't be a conversation.

Why is this issue only occurring in African countries? With over 1 billion people in China and India why has this never occurred?

Caster Semenya tried the same BS and it didn't work. I can't wait for Mboma to run 20.7 - 20.8 at Worlds for the 200M next year.

I wouldn't argue with you about numbers of reproductive organs. The point is she has enough male organs to generate male levels of testosterone - or she wouldn't have exceeded the IAAF limits prescribed for the longer events. Only women who dope to the heavens could hope to match what she produces by virtue of that male reproductive characteristic.

BuckleUp wrote:

If she was legit XX she would be running the 400 not the 200. Some of you are as gullible as f**k

This

The Namibians are not being open about this. FYI, her minders are white Namibian

"The testosterone advantage of Mboma over other participants is seen with the naked eye.

"In construction, movement, technique, at the same time as speed and endurance.

"She has the parameters of an 18-year-old boy, at that age my PB was 22.01 and she has done it in 21.97 in Tokyo."

"With progression and improvement in her technique, she will soon drop to 21.00 seconds in 200m and 47.00 seconds in the 400m," Urbas added.

It's necessary to understand why we have the rules we have today to fully understand why these athletes should be categorized as male rather than female.

The IAAF & Olympic squad organised a symposium in January 2010 in Miami, and met again in October 2010.

They knew that sport had continuously lost the battle against genetic males in sport, and repurposed the medical term 'hyperandrogenism', which applies to genetic females who suffer unpleasant or dangerous effects from high testosterone. This term was first announced to the public in April 2011, despite the fact that none of the affected athletes were ill - they had normal functioning testes, albeit that they might have had other hormonal differences unrelated to the primary function of testosterone in their bodies.

The original policy announced made a point of including female-only conditions such as luteoma of pregnancy, as if pregnant athletics suffering from high testosterone presented a fairness issue to women's sport, or as if women with ovarian tumours were somehow winning everything in sport. This was just a sham to get away from society's refusal to acknowledge the basic binary distinction between males and females on the basis of testes vs ovaries and the resulting sexual dimorphism we experience.

Having deliberately chosen to misrepresent the issue, eventually the rules were revised so that now they ONLY apply to:

1. athletes with testes or ovotestes

2. male levels of testosterone

3. testosterone sensitivity

In medical terms any athlete with a DSD should be raised as either male or female following an assessment of their condition. Being raised as male or female does not mean surgery must be performed - only that a gender role is assigned to the baby. This gender assignment medically is done based on factors most notably the effects of testosterone on the brain and body during puberty. Given the World Athletics conditions of male testosterone levels AND a virilizing effect of that testosterone, then a doctor is likely to advise that the baby should be raised as male, given that

1. the testosterone is likely to cause a male gender identity spontaneously, even if raised as female from birth

2. the affected individual will have either male fertility (sperm) or be infertile - they will not have female fertility (eggs)

For someone like Caster Semenya, it's not really clear what 'living as a woman' means - Caster Semenya is married to a woman and appear to adopt the male role in the relationship and likely fathered their two (one still unborn) children.

The World Athletics rules still allows CAIS athletes to compete (such athletes are likely to be taller than normal women) - these athletes, since they do not respond to testosterone at all, typically strongly identify as female. The ONLY affected conditions are those where essentially the delivery team made an error of sex assignment at birth, assigning DSD individuals as female, whereas objectively they should have been assigned as male.

That doesn't mean we have to call these DSD individuals men, but it does mean we should consider the fairness of allowing one individual to compete and banning another with the same condition, simply based on a decision made at birth.

floguy wrote:

I thought the same thing, she is going to win the 200 and it is going to be the story of the rest of the games.

She won!🥇🥳

Oh wait, she didn’t. Guess it isn’t the story for the rest of the games