If gender verification were mandatory for every athlete competing at a certain level, male or female, regardless of appearance or performance, I don’t think this would bother me. The bigger problem, from my perspective, is that a woman is being singled out because she’s a very good athlete and does not conform to phenotypical norms for 46,XX women.
The assumption of the male as the norm or standard is going to influence discussions on sex and gender. See Kimmy’s excellent response for more detail.
But isn’t the difference between men/women different from that between blacks/whites? Saying that blacks have thick lips instead of whites have thin lips is an example of being Eurocentric, sure. But in terms of athleticism, men generally are stronger/faster than women. I don’t think it’s being male centric to point that out.
Why don’t you just relax? The association between maleness and athletics is due to realit: men are stronger and faster. Period. Don’t believe me, check the record books for weight lifting, as well as any aspect of track and field. Males are the epitome of strength and speed. So, anyone can compete in a male field and it would not disadvantage males. The inverse is not true. Females would be disadvantaged—enormously. Now, if we have Martians in the mix and they could run 1-minute miles, male humans would no longer represent the epitome and we’d have a protected class of athlete called “males”, with no Martians allowed to compete in those events. That’s the way it is for females. If everything was an open field, a man could win every single event. I’m sure you’d love what that would do for women’s sports and female self-image. If someone exists between the two ideals, they can either compete up—in the male category, start there own intersexed division, or not compete and shut the fuck up. Really, this is ridiculous. Face reality.
1.) Semenya has an abnormally high level of testosterone for a woman, but she is not at all intersexed and is, in fact, a typical 46,XX woman.
2.) Semenya has an abnormally high level of testosterone for a woman, and she is intersexed.
Assume that the amount of testosterone in both scenarios is exactly the same. Would it be fair to strip Semenya of her medals in #2 but not #1? Why or why not?
You’re missing the point by a mile. It’s not that a difference is being observed–you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who would argue against the idea that on the great bell-curve of human strength, more men fall toward the higher end and more women fall toward the lower end.
What is being discussed is how the difference is phrased. Because the “men at the stronger end, women at the weaker end” is stated as women having a disadvantage, it presupposes a condition where men are the norm from which women deviate by being weaker. This is in opposition to women being the norm, where men would deviate by being stronger, which would then be phrased as an advantage.
Thus, to use the example again, because most swimmers are considered to make up the norm, Michael Phelps’s physiology gives him an advantage. You would almost certainly not say that his physiology gives everyone else a disadvantage.
I never realized how completely oblivious some people are to the language they choose, even when you diagram it out for them repeatedly. I want to hit some people over the head until they go study something about language beyond, like, an eighth-grade level. Ugh.
They possess genes that hinder their athletic performance. Let me ask you a question, someone asks you why we have 35 and older competitions. Do you say:
(1) Because young people are stronger, faster, and bigger or
(2) Because old people are slower, fatter, and weaker?
You use two because the subject is the people that are involved in the 35 and older competitions. It is the more natural flow despite the fact that being 35 and older is more common than being 34 or younger. The reason for this is that we are creating the 35+ age division and not a 34 and younger division. When you separate something you describe the qualities of that something to justify the separation. It doesn’t matter the question.
For example, if you ask me why do we have 600CC and lower motorcycle races, I would answer “Because sub 600CC bikes are slower than bikes with motors bigger than that”. Why do we have a lightweight weight class in wrestling? “Because being smaller is a disadvantage in wrestling”. On the other hand, if we created a steroid league and you asked me why I would say “Because steroids cause you to be bigger, faster, and stronger which is an unfair advantage”.
The fact that you launch into this feminist bullshit because I used language in the way it naturally flows speaks to your biases, not mine.
3.)Semenya has an abnormally high level of testosterone for a woman, because she’s a typical 46,XY dude, and is taping her penis down during races.
I’m assuming you’d be OK with stripping her of her medal in case #3, so the real question is where do you draw the line? You have to draw a line somewhere, at some point, some level of genetic “non womanness” you must say “this person does not meet our criteria for a woman”, while some lesser genetic difference meets that criteria.
Again your argument falls short because the women in question can not compete as well as elite men. Not even close. Therefore, the idea that we are somehow reflexively calling her a man in order to defend some notion of male superiority is ludicrous because she hasn’t done anything to challenge male athletic superiority.
My point here is not the particular case of Caster Semanya. Your method of resolving the intersexed dilemma is to count the competitor as a woman, unless the competitor could compete equally with men, at which point, rather than throwing the male-faster equivalence overboard, you would make room in the male classification (nevermind that this person is, according to you, “by definition” not a woman, and so, one would think, equally “by definition” not a man) for the superior athlete. You definition is therefore plainly committed to supporting your thesis of male athletic superiority. But once this aspect of your criteria of maleness is made apparent, the justification is revealed as circular.
Don’t doping tests include some range checks to see whether or not some blood values are too much out of the ordinary? I have some vague memory saying so. Does that apply to hormone levels? Such limits would be problematic if the anomaly is natural.
My rule is to count the competitor as female unless it is apparent that her intersexness is giving her a competitive advantage. It isn’t because this woman is fast, it is because she has the body of a male. If she had the body of a female and ran fast I wouldn’t object.
I don’t know how they handle hormone tests, but if Semenya’s testosterone levels are “three times higher than those normally expected in a female sample” then that’s still nowhere near typical male levels. The average man’s testosterone levels would be about 50 times higher than that of the average female.
You will find the relevant information under “normal results”. A low-testosterone male (300ng/dL) still has 4 times the testosterone of a high-testosterone female (80ng/dL), and 15 times the testosterone of a low-testosterone female (20ng/dL). A high-testosterone male (1000ng/dL) has 50 times the testosterone of a low-testosterone female (20ng/dL), and 12 times the testosterone of a high-testosterone female (80ng/dL). The article claims that Semenya has 3 times the average female, that would average to about a 150ng/dL, which while it may be NEARLY twice the “high” level of normal, is half that of a “low” level of normal for males, and would have to be multiplied 4 times to reach the average “normal” level for males of approximately 650ng/dL.
In other words, testosterone-wise, Semenya is far closer to female than male, and I’d suspect more hormonal “enhancement” (which would be the fault of the trainers of the recently-18 girl) than intersexuality or maleness.
It bothered me that the article states that her testosterone level is three times that of an average female, but doesn’t say how she compares to the average elite female athlete. Just a WAG, but I wouldn’t be surprised if female athletes tend to have higher testosterone levels, either because their level increases as a result of their training, or because women with naturally higher testosterone are more likely to succeed in sport and become elite athletes.
Are you sure that’s not what they meant? I realize that the article is vague, but it could still be interpreted to mean as a sample taken in athletic circumstances.
In every case, you cited a class that deviates from the norm. The fact that you believe that language “naturally flows” in such a way as to establish the male as the norm… heh. I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine whose biases are demonstrated.
That is not a possibility here. **Nobody **thinks that Semenya is a normal 46,XY man. **Nobody **is accusing her of deliberately cheating. That’s my line.
