Korean Job Discussion Forums

[bacasper]

Could the Women's 800-meter World Champ Be a Man?

By William Lee Adams
Thursday, Aug. 20, 2009

South African runner Caster Semenya's muscular physique helped propel her to victory during the 800 meters at Wednesday night's world track and field championships in Berlin. Now that physique, coupled with an ongoing gender verification test, is fueling suspicion that Semenya could be stripped of her medal because she is actually a he.

Semenya, 18, came to the world's attention on July 30 after winning the African Junior Championships in Mauritius. There, she posted 1:56.72, the fastest 800-meter run of the year � even when including senior-level competitors. Competing in her first senior championship on Wednesday, Semenya once again clocked the fastest time of the year � 1:55.45 � and finished a whopping two seconds ahead of the defending world champion.

That astonishing margin of victory only added to the speculation that had started after Semenya's win in July � could the women's 800-meter world champion be a man? Ahead of the Aug. 19 final, officials from the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), track and field's governing body, confirmed that Semenya had agreed to a gender-testing process that began in South Africa and was ongoing in Germany. Officials wouldn't give details of the testing, but did say that it involves an endocrinologist, a gynecologist, a psychologist, and both internal and external examinations.

...

But Dr. Rob Ritchie, a urological surgeon at Oxford University and the author of "Intersex and the Olympic Games," a recent article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, says that determining someone's sex is not so simple, and that external genitalia can be misleading. A post-mortem on Stephens' body in 1980 revealed that she had "ambiguous genitalia." The post-mortem didn't go into specifics, but those genitalia could have been a small *beep* that was mistaken for an enlarged clitoris, or a small scrotum that resembled labia. (Read "Feeling Betrayed by Marion Jones.")

Ritchie notes that female athletes who in the past have been suspected of being men may have suffered from Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), a condition in which a person who is genetically male � that is, their 23rd chromosome pair is XY � is resistant to androgens, the male sex hormones that include testosterone. As a result, the testes present in that person's abdomen never descend, and neither they nor their parents ever realize they are actually boys. Those with complete AIS will have a totally female body on the outside, but will lack ovaries and a uterus. Others may demonstrate partial AIS. "They are partly sensitive to the male hormone so they might develop some male characteristics," he says. "They may well be a bit more muscular and have facial hair."

full article at link

[bacasper]

This case presents an interesting conundrum: how exactly do we define gender?

Is it simply a matter of whether or not one has a *beep*? Or is it more complicated, such as what types of chromosomes one has? What about gender identity, especially when it is incongruent with phenotype, i.e. the transgendered? What about the pre-op trans vs. the post-op?

And then there is the whole problem of true and pseudo hermaphroditism. Congenital adrenal hyperplasia patients may appear to have external male genitalia but possess genotype XX.
There is a community in New Guinea, I believe, where 5-alpha reductase deficiency is not rare. This causes a lack of testosterone in utero and infancy resulting in boys born with a female phenotype. Treated as female children, at puberty they grow penises! There are other relevant medical conditions as well.

And then there are the true hermaphrodites who possess both male and female genitalia. In which event do they compete? Is it fair to ban them altogether?

[Fox]

An excellent reason why it's time to abolish the sexist practice of dividing sporting competitions into male and female. Surely in true competitive spirit what matters is who is the best human -- regardless of their gender -- and giving women their own events is sexist and demeaning.

[bacasper]

I actually agree with this, but in this case to not have "separate but equal" facilities and opportunities is, bizarrely, considered sexist!

Seriously, does women's basketball, for example, excite anywhere near as much interest as men's? Is it only due to a history of socialized sexism?

In professional tennis, women only play three sets instead of five to win the same prize money.

We just saw this year the filly Rachel Alexandra beat colts in The Preakness Stakes.

Sometimes the girls can beat the boys. Let them compete together, and let's not discriminate against the hermaphrodites and transgendered.

[seonsengnimble]

You realize that If men and women played sports together that the end result would be no women in most sports, right?

Maybe fencing, bowling and ping pong would have women, but I can't think of many others.

I realize this may come off as sexist, but there are physical differences between men and women.

For example:

Fastest 100m by a man: 9.58seconds
Fastest 100m by a woman: 10.49seconds

Fastest 20km by a man: 56:25.98
Fastest 20km by a woman: 1:05:26.6

Highest jump by a man: 2.45 m
Highest jump by a woman: 2.09 m

Heaviest deadlift by a man: 457.5 kg
Heaviest deadlift by a woman: 228.45 kg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Bolton

http://www.straighttothebar.com/2008/02/interview_on_the_deadlift_with.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_jump

http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/archive/records/

[bacasper]

[Fox]

[RufusW]

Fox, sport is obviously different to business etc.

Women cannot compete with men in a huge number of sports (imagine, rugby).... should they be denied the oppourtunity to try and be the best they can be? No.

Sex is determined by DNA. If physically it's somehow mixed then they should be conisdered men (as they may technically have an advantage over women).

[Fox]

[RufusW]

Although sport relies on physical attributes to gain income, this is a side-product not the main reason for doing so. I'm sure most atheletes would continue their sport regradless of the income - they do it for the endorphines rushing through their body when they break the record/beat the other team.

Yes, discrimination exists because it has to. You may argue intellectually men are better than women so discrimination in the workplace should exist but it's scientific fact that women can't be equals to men in a sport like rugby (or tennis, but maybe not something like golf) - but they can compete when it's women only. So what's the problem?

They know they're not the best 'in the world', but they're the best of their gender. Chromosomes will usually decide how much muscle you can build up or how good your reflexes are. It seems reasonable to classify athletes according to these pre-existing conditions (and yes, you may extend this to the difference between African/European athletes, but this is unpalatable right now.)

[JMO]

[JMO]

Also..couldn't the same thing be said about age classifications? Why are my local under 14s soccer clubs allowed to discriminate against those over 14?

[mises]

[seonsengnimble]

[mises]