Biological males in women's sport

Kermit.de.frog

Zorya wrote: »

The look on yer wan's face on the left

KSU

Danzy wrote: »

He was a poor runner, now she is on track for Olympic success.

Still a long way off to be honest over the 400mh about 5 seconds off making the US women's team.

Cryptopagan

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The look on yer wan's face on the left

The ones either side both finished ahead of her.

Blinky Plebum

KSU wrote: »

Still a long way off to be honest over the 400mh about 5 seconds off making the US women's team.

So what.

She has an advantage due to being born male.

Thats the issue not whether she wins every single race she enters.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The look on yer wan's face on the left

She’s thinking “Why do I fücking bother?”.

KSU

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

So what.

She has an advantage due to being born male.

Thats the issue not whether she wins every single race she enters.

Completely agree I was correcting the person who said that CeCe was in line for Olympic success in womens category. In fact the proof that there is a biological advantage is clear when you see here being beaten over the shorter hurdles where technique plays more of a role yet utterly dominant over the longer hurdles.

This is the same reason why women's 400m hurdles is often criticised as being at too low a height that it negates the technical aspect of the event somewhat and usually rewards the fastest flat speed runners.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

KSU wrote: »

Actually they will kill women's sport. Biologically born women will lose opportunity of scholarships and sponsorship and many women believe the same

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIlq85dL0C4

It also will have huge ramifications on drug testing (will have to ammend Testosterone thresholds and a number of others)

Fair play, that girl, for sticking her neck out to speak out.

Cryptopagan

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

She’s thinking “Why do I fücking bother?”.

She finished ahead of the transgirl, so no she isn’t.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Cryptopagan wrote: »

She finished ahead of the transgirl, so no she isn’t.

I was joking so wasn’t too bothered about looking up the result.

Wibbs

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Fair play, that girl, for sticking her neck out to speak out.

+1 Though I could do without the usual Yank OMINOUS MUSIC stuff and no doubt some sort of wider agenda going on, yeah, she is brave for calling out what is fcuking obvious to anyone with eyes to see and a mind unfettered by current dogma, oppressive dogma it can be too.

If I were to say what I'm really thinking about this ballsology even here, never mind on Twitter or wherever with a wider audience, no matter how respectfully and balanced, I would be circumscribed, banned, shouted down. When we're at the stage where the WHO has declared that Transgender is no longer a disorder of any kind , we're through the bloody looking glass here. This, like our own HSE stating that we can change biological gender, is throwing actual science and medicine on the pyre of an utter fcuking nonsense sociopolitical theory. Frankly I've had my bloody fill of this kind of bullshit. And I doubt I'm alone in this.

Zorya

Wibbs wrote: »

Frankly I've had my bloody fill of this kind of bullshit. And I doubt I'm alone in this.

]

It might be surprising to know that I have had my bloody fill of this bull given that I post on it regularly. Indeed those I speak to offline about it tell me to stop troubling myself with it as I can't stop the madness. But it is easier for men to say that in my opinion as it is not them who will suffer the most when biological reality loses all its meaning. I'm not on the side of the third or fourth wave feminists couching their defence against this in the worn out arguments about patriarchy or rape culture etc. And I find there are a large number of young women who shout transphobia louder than anyone, which is depressing given what they are handing over to ideologues. It is the assault on reason that offends me most , well, after the interference with immature bodies and minds, and the unpredictable incoherent consequences that will result from it. Sex based differences are facts. It's madness to think anything else.

The Highwayman

The only way for women athletes to combat its is to not engage. You are playing a person born a man in a tennis match. Refuse to play, running against a person born a man in a race the other 7 refuse to run. If all sports turn into Male born walk overs then there will have to be a reaction.

Zorya

The Highwayman wrote: »

The only way for women athletes to combat its is to not engage. You are playing a person born a man in a tennis match. Refuse to play, running against a person born a man in a race the other 7 refuse to run. If all sports turn into Male born walk overs then there will have to be a reaction.

That cannot work. It is like saying to men who are discriminated against by gender quotas - do not participate in that area. One of my sons faces quotas in a specialised STEM area at advanced research levels, where there are simply much fewer female candidates (or interest!), and yet positions or funding are awarded taking into account gender quotas. Why should he have to withdraw from his area of expertise for the unfairness to be removed? The unfairness in any area should be challenged on an intellectual and empirical basis. There should not be the need for gimmicks for reason to reign.

The Highwayman

Zorya wrote: »

That cannot work. It is like saying to men who are discriminated against by gender quotas - do not participate in that area. One of my sons faces quotas in a specialised STEM area at advanced research levels, where there are simply much fewer female candidates (or interest!), and yet positions or funding are awarded taking into account gender quotas. Why should he have to withdraw from his area of expertise for the unfairness to be removed? The unfairness in any area should be challenged on an intellectual and empirical basis. There should not be the need for gimmicks for reason to reign.

I totally agree gender quotas are not fair as is 'positive discrimination'.

I think what I suggest will make an impact by the fact that if you have an arena or stadium full of people and nobody runs against the Male born person it won't be long before people turn against it. Or imagine a tennis game where the female refused to even try and return a serve and simply underhanded her serves into the net. Taking as much time as possible but not actually taking part in the match. The public and more importantly the money behind the sport will have to act. Its basically civil disobedience and it works.

razorblunt

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

She’s thinking “Why do I fücking bother?”.

He/She didn't even finish in the top 3 in that race.

Zorya

The Highwayman wrote: »

I totally agree gender quotas are I fair as is 'positive discrimination'.

I think what I suggest will make an impact by the fact that if you have an arena or stadium full of people and nobody runs against the Male born person it won't be long before people turn against it. Or imagine a tennis game where the female refused to even try and return a serve and simply underhanded her serves into the net. Taking as much time as possible but not actually taking part in the match. The public and more importantly the money behind the sport will have to act. Its basically civil disobedience and it works.

If the spectators at thatfoot race with CeCe or the spectators at bike races with McKinnon or in weight lifting arenas where Mary whatshisface are walking away with women's records and medals cannot turn against it by seeing the evidence of biological reality and idiocy in front of their very own eyes then I'm not sure civil disobedience could work in this case to prick people's conscience. I don't have that much faith in the masses, I'm afraid, the amorphous public is being led by the nose, not to mention being actively silenced if they speak up. And as for the money behind the sports! Christ, big companies seem to be going out of their way to be the most woke. Converse uses that poor transkid Desmond in their adverts - him appearing in videos with drugged up murderers aping sniffing coke or ketamine or dancing provocatively in gay clubs at night doesn't appear to matter to the message. Sponsors me hole.The only big company I have seen lately taking any kind of stand against what they called ''Utopian socialists'' is Crossfit, and that's because their CEO is supposed to bea bit of an oddball.

alan partridge aha

Anyone with a brain knows that women's sports is fu5ked until sporting bodies grow a pair and sort the trans issue.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

razorblunt wrote: »

He/She didn't even finish in the top 3 in that race.

Again, I was joking and had no interest in the result.

_Godot_

A ray of hope and sunshine imo. Ruling temporarily suspended.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jun/03/caster-semenya-800m-swiss-supreme-court-ruling-iaaf

Zorya

_Godot_ wrote: »

A ray of hope and sunshine imo. Ruling temporarily suspended.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jun/03/caster-semenya-800m-swiss-supreme-court-ruling-iaaf

''A ray of hope and sunshine''? That makes me cross, that someone can so casually gloat over the potential demolition of women's sports.

Actually I feel sorry for Caster on a personal level, She seems to have always been a nice and good person and she is not to be faulted. She is also intersex which is not transgender. NOT TRANSGENDER, get it? It is a vastly different scenario than some of these ignorant bullies who identify as women post a male puberty and all its advantages and who then, despite being very mediocre as male athletes, go on to wipe out the biological female competition. The only ray of hope and sunshine will be when biological males are out of women's sport. Full stop.

BattleCorp

Caster Semenya is not a biological male. I've no problem with Caster competing in female events. Caster didn't choose her intersex condition. She was born that way.

I do however have a problem with transwomen like Hannah Mouncey competing in female events because they were born a biological male but decided to identify as female.

ceadaoin.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Caster Semenya is not a biological male. I've no problem with Caster competing in female events. Caster didn't choose her intersex condition. She was born that way.

I do however have a problem with transwomen like Hannah Mouncey competing in female events because they were born a biological male but decided to identify as female.

Caster semenya is a biological male with XY chromosomes and testes which produce testosterone. No, this situation is not the same as a trans woman, but Semenya has known this for at least 10 years and chooses to still compete, despite only identifying as a woman for sporting purposes. Have a look, "she" presents and lives as a man and is in a "heterosexual" (their own words) marriage with a woman. biological males should not be competing in women's sports. End of.

Zorya

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Caster semenya is a biological male with XY chromosomes and testes which produce testosterone. No, this situation is not the same as a trans woman, but Semenya has known this for at least 10 years and chooses to still compete, despite only identifying as a woman for sporting purposes. Have a look, "she" presents and lives as a man and is in a "heterosexual" (their own words) marriage with a woman. biological males should not be competing in women's sports. End of.

I didn't know most of that.

ceadaoin.

Zorya wrote: »

I didn't know most of that.

If you read the ruling that originally stopped her from competing, it says it applies to XY DSD people. XX females are not subjected to any restrictions. Semenya first was officially tested 10 years ago so would have been aware of this from then at least

KSU

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Caster semenya is a biological male with XY chromosomes and testes which produce testosterone. No, this situation is not the same as a trans woman, but Semenya has known this for at least 10 years and chooses to still compete, despite only identifying as a woman for sporting purposes. Have a look, "she" presents and lives as a man and is in a "heterosexual" (their own words) marriage with a woman. biological males should not be competing in women's sports. End of.

Actually Semenya is XY female. She is a a DSD athlete. This has been scientifically proven and the reason why she was not excluded from competition for so long till rules were drawn up to deal with the unique case of these athletes (not just Semenya but her, Niyonsaba and Chand are among the three high profile athletes in recent times)

She didn't present as a man her partner mistook her as such and she has clearly stated her sexual orientation from a young age.

While this is a completely different situation I do agree that Semenya and Niyonsaba should not be competing in women's sports because it is a protected class and this should be protected against both males and intersex for the fairness of women athletes. You can't discriminate against the majority for the same of the less than 1%.

ceadaoin.

KSU wrote: »

Actually Semenya is XY female. She is a a DSD athlete. This has been scientifically proven and the reason why she was not excluded from competition for so long till rules were drawn up to deal with the unique case of these athletes (not just Semenya but her, Niyonsaba and Chand are among the three high profile athletes in recent times)

She didn't present as a man her partner mistook her as such and she has clearly stated her sexual orientation from a young age.

While this is a completely different situation I do agree that Semenya and Niyonsaba should not be competing in women's sports because it is a protected class and this should be protected against both males and intersex for the fairness of women athletes. You can't discriminate against the majority for the same of the less than 1%.

Read the ruling. It says that semenya was banned under the rules applying to XY DSD athletes

Edit sorry I thought you said xx female. Semenya is not an XY female (is there such a thing? XXY perhaps?) either. She has no female reproductive organs and undescended testes according to leaked report.

judeboy101

KSU wrote: »

Actually Semenya is XY female. She is a a DSD athlete. This has been scientifically proven and the reason why she was not excluded from competition for so long till rules were drawn up to deal with the unique case of these athletes (not just Semenya but her, Niyonsaba and Chand are among the three high profile athletes in recent times)

She didn't present as a man her partner mistook her as such and she has clearly stated her sexual orientation from a young age.

While this is a completely different situation I do agree that Semenya and Niyonsaba should not be competing in women's sports because it is a protected class and this should be protected against both males and intersex for the fairness of women athletes. You can't discriminate against the majority for the same of the less than 1%.

Hate to break this to you but only male mammals carry the Y chromosome.

KSU

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Read the ruling. It says that semenya was banned under the rules applying to XY DSD athletes

I have been following the case in depth for the past 10 years.

XY female are intersex as they can still have female reproductive organs while also having (under developed) male genitalia. That rule is based on Testosterone as a determining factor rather than a classification. IAAF didn't wanna go down the road of sex classifications as that brought its own host of legal issues where is testosterone levels is something which is quantifiable and through hormone treatment does not exclude an athlete (easier to say you have to get X treatment rather than a complete ban which doping life bans have proven are unenforceable)

judeboy101 wrote: »

Hate to break this to you but only male mammals carry the Y chromosome.

You probably should look into it a bit more gene mutuation can have a whole host of affects on sex determination irrespective of chromosones (Klinefelter Syndrome, Turner Syndrome, Swyer syndrome just to name a few)

Fusitive

KSU wrote: »

I have been following the case in depth for the past 10 years.

XY female are intersex as they can still have female reproductive organs while also having (under developed) male genitalia. That rule is based on Testosterone as a determining factor rather than a classification. IAAF didn't wanna go down the road of sex classifications as that brought its own host of legal issues where is testosterone levels is something which is quantifiable and through hormone treatment does not exclude an athlete (easier to say you have to get X treatment rather than a complete ban which doping life bans have proven are unenforceable)



You probably should look into it a bit more gene mutuation can have a whole host of affects on sex determination irrespective of chromosones (Klinefelter Syndrome, Turner Syndrome, Swyer syndrome just to name a few)

I agree with you that XY is not the full determination of Male but the example you gave aren't accurate in this case.

Swyer syndrome for instance does not produce testosterone levels above female levels as the gonads are streaked and do not work.

Turner syndrome is not 46 XY(missing an X chromosome, 45 X and is classified as female because the missing chromosome if present would be 46 XX)

neither is klinefelter which is 47 XXY( and is actually classified as male carrying an extra X chromosone)

KSU

Fusitive wrote: »

I agree with you that XY is not the full determination of Male but the example you gave aren't accurate in this case.

Swyer syndrome for instance does not produce testosterone levels above female levels as the gonads are streaked and do not work.

Turner syndrome is not 46 XY(missing an X chromosome, 45 X and is classified as female because the missing chromosome if present would be 46 XX)

neither is klinefelter which is 47 XXY( and is actually classified as male carrying an extra X chromosone)

My references were to gene mutation and disorders as general examples in response to previous poster, not related to the case. It was pointing out the nuance of the subject beyond "only male mammals carry the Y chromosome."