Caster Semenya (Read 229 times)

The politics of Ms. Semenya and a MtF transitioned athlete are different.  Caster was born female (has female genitalia) so by conventional wisdom is female and should be able to compete female.  Many religious conservatives who would be against transitioned athletes should support her competing female (but don't because she's black, which is a separate issue).  Anyone who thinks race is not a factor in this is deluding themselves.  If she was an attractive white woman we would not be having this discussion.

I think the situation is complicated and sad, and doesn't lend itself to any solution that satisfies all parties.

Ross Tucker (he did the 2016 Joanna Harper interview mentioned above) has a lot of detailed articles on the Castor Case going back since 2009 up to this June 19 CAS decision on SportScientists.com.  Highlighting interesting point some which have been brought up here and others not so much.  Also, delving in to the court case in detail.  He was an expert witness for Castor in the recent arbitration against IAFF.

I had assumed the scientific proof of Intersex (DSD) advantage due to elevated Testosterone levels was indisputable fact and not a “Just So” story based on equating intersex with transgender male to female or women to XY men.  Like all of this debate, turns out not to be so simple:

https://sportsscientists.com/2019/05/on-dsds-the-theory-of-testosterone-performance-the-cas-ruling-on-caster-semenya/

I find his argument compelling.  The podcast therein is also a good listen for this point of view.

For discussion on the arguments in Casors case specifically are also insightful:

Full text website link to discussion of June 19th CAS ruling.

I excerpted the conclusion but the whole article definitely  worth a look:

“ It all leaves me feeling really uneasy. A DSD is not a Trans MTF athlete. By the very nature of having a DSD, they do not develop typically as males. So take the case of 5-ARD, which the CAS verdict makes clear is a big issue here. The IAAF argue that they are “biologically indistinguishable…in all relevant aspects”.

What they mean by this is that with the exception of the external genitalia, which may be ambiguous or female, leading to the identification of a person as female at birth, a person with 5-ARD is biologically male and should thus compete as a male for the purposes of sport.

That’s the theory. But my position is that if you’re going to impose on someone a new biological reality at the age of say 18, because they happen to be a fast female runner, then you had better be really, really sure that it’s necessary. And so until you can establish that having 5-ARD does not affect any other physiology that may impact on sport, I can’t see how you can move so swiftly towards labeling someone male (even if you do say you accept their gender identity), and then prescribing possibly harmful drugs to them? That’s why more research into 5-ARD is required – does the absence of DHT affect any physiology that may have sporting implications? If the answer is “we don’t know” or “maybe”, then you absolutely have to hit pause and assess what those implications are before you continue.

The same is true, even more emphatically, for PAIS (Partial Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome). This occurs is a person who cannot, by definition, use testosterone. So on what basis is that person being treated as having performance advantages that are the same as biological male who does not have PAIS? The fact that the DSD Regulations names and treats five conditions without discerning that they may not all have performance implications is a problem to me.

This is why the “numbers matter” – the policy is not benign. It’s potentially catastrophic and damaging. The most powerful testimony of the whole case came from Drs Payoshni Mitra and Lih-Mei Liao, who spoke of the challenges in dealing with DSD cases in a clinical setting, let alone the sporting one. DSD women are different from trans MTF in many respects, past, present and future, and I’m not comfortable with a Regulation that treats them equally, using medical protocols that are not known to be safe, and not chosen by the athlete.

Anyway, that’s that for now. The most complex issue in sport isn’t going away, so perhaps the appeal process will bring it back into view.

Ross”

First, I am no expert but here is what Ive learned so far about her condition. My understanding is Castors condition is “46 XY DsD.”  The DsD means disorders of sexual development.  This group of conditions is also referred to as “intersex” sometimes.

These are a group of disorders of varying androgen (including testosterone)  sensitivity  with elevated testosterone  levels in the blood above the female range.

These individuals have a range of sensitivity (or responsiveness) to testosterone.  The condition CAIS is completely unresponsiveness (so no argument that the excess testosterone could be a benefit, it cannot act even though it is elevated).

Then there is partial androgen sensitivity(PAIS).  A third condition often mentioned in this group is 5-alpha reductase deficiency.  This is basically lack of ability to convert testosterone to the hormone DHT.  This hormone is involved in sexual differentiation. This situation an individual will have XY and undescended testis and elevated levels of testosterone but often normal external female genitalia.

I have read it is speculated that she has 5 alpha reductase deficiency type of DsD. I do not understand how that is know vs the other condition.  I believe we know she has elevated testosterone (but not the level) because she was “forcibly” tested after the Berlin World Championship 2009, at age 18 and this information was leaked to the public (by some accounts before she knew it).  But someone correct me if I am wrong.  Because she is affected by the recent IAFF guidelines we can say her testosterone level is above 5 ng/ml which is their threshold.

She has not ever volunteered her chromosomal sex or testosterone level to the public.  She was raised as a female.

Edited.

“46 XY DsD.”

So, she has a Y chromosome.

So this 46 XY dsd seems to be very advantageous to women middle distance runners. I just found out that all the medalists in the Rio Women's 800m are 46 XY dsd.

The Olympics required female athletes to verify "femininity" for a while via the "naked walk" in which they paraded unclothed past judges. This was replaced by a test examining cells for BarrBodies which are X chromosomes that have compacted and become inactivated. Then, that was replaced by making karyotopes, a picture of the full complement of chromosomes from a cell. Now, the present test is for testosterone.

If you want to give it a try, here is a link to an educational activity I have my students do in AP Biology class.

http://media.hhmi.org/biointeractive/click/gendertest/gendertest.html

Great link.  Thanks for posting that.  The problem is more complicated than just having the XY chromosomes vs XX.

T-Hound; I think we all concur that these runners do not fall into either the "female" or "male" categories, but a mixture of both. AND that they should be allowed to compete. The issue at hand would be how to classify them for competition that is fair to other contestants, and perhaps a 3rd category or asterisk is needed. Something like;

1st, Women's 800m: Jane Doe*, 1:57.43

*46 XY DsD

Kind of like "wind aided" added to sprint times, or a footnote saying a time was achieved when an athlete was later found to be doping, like Ben Johnson. Creating a 3rd category is a ridiculous idea. The IAAF arriving at it's "solution" is unfair, but it is more fair than other options (banning, requiring them to compete as men, etc). They really have a no-win situation on their hands.

It is weird that few have shown up in the sprints, throws and jumps, all explosive strength-oriented events. That's a study in it's own right.

 

I just see an empty red page. Is that a test of some kind?

Do you also see a large grey box in the upper left hand corner asking to run Adobe Flash?  I think you have to five the page permission by clicking on that to see the content.