I suppose the intersex will be allowed to compete against men. I can't think of any event that women are better at than men, except maybe gymnastics but I'm no expert, so I doubt you'd be able to argue that female characteristics (derriving from being semi-female, genetically) are giving an unfair advantage over men?.
I cannot see how this will work especialy if intersex athletes are listed on birth certificates and passports as women.
Also it may be the case that they have more testoterone than the norm for women but less than the norm for men so it seems unlikely that there will ever be a platform on which they are alowed to compete. I don't see how this can be resolved.
Did she have higher testosterone levels than the rest in the race then? Some of the most competitive women might have more testosterone than she does.
Yes, I agree - gender isn't as clear cut as we'd like to think. Athletics pretty much celebrates genetic or environmental peculiarities - someone who has longer legs, a bigger lung capacity, has grown up at a higher altitude, more muscle tissue, etc. I think it makes us comfortable to think there's this tidy line that can be drawn between males and females, but a fair few people transgress it in one way or another.
What about someone who is genetically entirely female, but has abnormally high levels of testosterone in her body, allowing her a genetic advantage over most other women?
I think the question here is what is it, specifically, that gives Semenya an unfair advantage over other women in the race - are we talking very high levels of testosterone? If so, at least that's something that's objectively measurable (as opposed to, say, 'She's got muscles, so she can't be female :rolleyes:).
I am of the believe that there are "normal" female athletes who have naturally high levels of testosterone which corresponds to the level Semenya is reported to have. It's just tough for the other athletes they have to compete against! For that reason alone, I think it will be unfair to rule Semenya out of competing as a female based solely on her testosterone levels!
Edit: I see the poster above me has made a similar point
I cannot see how this will work especialy if intersex athletes are listed on birth certificates and passports as women.
Also it may be the case that they have more testoterone than the norm for women but less than the norm for men so it seems unlikely that there will ever be a platform on which they are alowed to compete. I don't see how this can be resolved.
Yes I have no idea how they ought to go about identifying the intersex but once it's come to light, as with Caster, then I believe they should be allowed to compete on the male side.
We separate men and women in most sports because if it was mixed, women would stand no chance. When separate leagues for each gender were created 100s of years ago, I imagine it was more clear-cut to determine men and women.
In the 21st century, we have transsexual people being recognised as their new gender legally and much more knowledge of intersex people.
I don't believe you can make a decision on this specific case without reviewing what we define as 'female' for sporting purposes, why we make that distinction and how.
We separate men and women in most sports because if it was mixed, women would stand no chance. When separate leagues for each gender were created 100s of years ago, I imagine it was more clear-cut to determine men and women.
In the 21st century, we have transsexual people being recognised as their new gender legally and much more knowledge of intersex people.
I don't believe you can make a decision on this specific case without reviewing what we define as 'female' for sporting purposes, why we make that distinction and how.
There's a simple solution, scrap women's sport. If we're all honest it's always played second fiddle to the men's version anyway.
We separate men and women in most sports because if it was mixed, women would stand no chance. When separate leagues for each gender were created 100s of years ago, I imagine it was more clear-cut to determine men and women.
In the 21st century, we have transsexual people being recognised as their new gender legally and much more knowledge of intersex people.
I don't believe you can make a decision on this specific case without reviewing what we define as 'female' for sporting purposes, why we make that distinction and how.
Yes I agree, I think that's the key issue. I heard Denise Lewis speaking about this when the news first came out, and she said it's a dangerous road to go down where an athlete's gender is challenged on the basis that they don't look 'feminine' enough. If there were proper guidelines in place as to how we define 'female' for sporting purposes, it'd be easier for objective decisions to be made on cases like this.
After all, it's clearly not just a question of Semenya being good because she's got both male and female hormones - the vast, vast majority of men could not compete at the same level as top female athletes. There are far more genetic, emotional and environmental advantages going on here than just her gender.
You're probably right that back when the divisions between male and female sport were first created, we didn't know anywhere near as much about the science of gender and the various hormones involved; dividing men and women for the purposes of sport would've been fairly simple (ironically, Semenya would almost certainly have been able to compete as a woman without a problem!). I think this is an interesting case in that it questions our assumptions that the sexes can be very easily and simply divided, which is probably an unsettling idea for many.
I'd argue too that dividing men and women for sport is also a bit of a reassuring reinforcement of gender lines, because it happens even where arguably men have no physical advantage - sports like bowls and snooker, for instance. 15 year old Michelle Wei made a pretty good fist of competing against grown men at golf, before (IIRC?) she was prevented from competing. I'm kind of hoping the Williams sisters decide to take up golf after they're finished with tennis - it'd be very interesting, since I can't imagine either of them being at a physical disadvantage against most of the male golfers!
Yes I agree, I think that's the key issue. I heard Denise Lewis speaking about this when the news first came out, and she said it's a dangerous road to go down where an athlete's gender is challenged on the basis that they don't look 'feminine' enough. If there were proper guidelines in place as to how we define 'female' for sporting purposes, it'd be easier for objective decisions to be made on cases like this.
After all, it's clearly not just a question of Semenya being good because she's got both male and female hormones - the vast, vast majority of men could not compete at the same level as top female athletes. There are far more genetic, emotional and environmental advantages going on here than just her gender.
You're probably right that back when the divisions between male and female sport were first created, we didn't know anywhere near as much about the science of gender and the various hormones involved; dividing men and women for the purposes of sport would've been fairly simple (ironically, Semenya would almost certainly have been able to compete as a woman without a problem!). I think this is an interesting case in that it questions our assumptions that the sexes can be very easily and simply divided, which is probably an unsettling idea for many.
I'd argue too that dividing men and women for sport is also a bit of a reassuring reinforcement of gender lines, because it happens even where arguably men have no physical advantage - sports like bowls and snooker, for instance. 15 year old Michelle Wei made a pretty good fist of competing against grown men at golf, before (IIRC?) she was prevented from competing. I'm kind of hoping the Williams sisters decide to take up golf after they're finished with tennis - it'd be very interesting, since I can't imagine either of them being at a physical disadvantage against most of the male golfers!
But there's more to it than just physicality when you're comparing sports like Snooker, Darts and Golf. Men also have better spacial awareness as well as hand-eye coordination which is why when they have entered a women into a man's tournament, like they ried in Golf, they still lose.
But there's more to it than just physicality when you're comparing sports like Snooker, Darts and Golf. Men also have better spacial awareness as well as hand-eye coordination which is why when they have entered a women into a man's tournament, like they ried in Golf, they still lose.
Michelle Wei did pretty well competing against the men though, particularly when you consider she was only 15 at the time; you don't see a lot of 15 year old boys in men's golf playing as well as she did. I have a feeling she had to stop playing in the end because they weren't happy with her competing, rather than because she wasn't good enough. I'd be backing the Williams sisters to hold their own against the men if they took up the sport - I suspect their hand-eye co-ordination is pretty decent.
I disagree that men inevitably have better spatial awareness than women, too - perhaps you could say that as a general rule, but there are always going to be women who depart from the norm in that respect, and are able to compete alongside men.
In sports like bowls, women are actually now being given more opportunity to compete against men. I played as a teenager, and the reason I quit was that I got so infuriated that the boys would go off to compete in big competitions every month, while us girls had to stay behind in the club and play practice games. I was better than most of the boys, and routinely beat them in club competitions, but I could see that I would fall further and further behind because I didn't have the same opportunities to play against very good players as they did. Thankfully, that's changing now - there's a new system they've brought in at the top level where men and women compete alongside one another, though I don't think it's filtered down to club level yet.
Snooker/bowls/darts are not that dissimilar in terms of the qualities needed to excel in them. Golf is slightly different of course, in that strength is a factor - but in cases where a woman can match the men, as with Michelle Wei, I see no reason why she shouldn't be able to compete alongside them.
I don't think it's possible to say women couldn't compete against men in sports where there are no physical advantages to be had from men being stronger, because girls in general don't have the same opportunities to compete in those sports that men do. Until that changes, and until women are encouraged to play those sports as much as men are, it's impossible to make a true comparison. There may well be certain hormonal or physical advantages to be had for women in some sports that don't require strength - they're not inevitably inferior (women's flexibility is generally superior, for instance).
I think it's highly unlikely a woman could ever consistently be right at the top of men's golf, simply because of the strength issue. On the other hand, some of them could probably compete at a pretty decent level, especially when you consider a 60 year old man nearly won the last Open. Reading the article, it's amazing to think that not even Tiger Woods came close as a teenager to making the cut for a major tournament, as Michelle Wei did.
Again, I guess with women's golf generally being played at a far lower level than men's and with it being so much less competitive, it's difficult to compare like with like. The fact one woman - Annika Sorenstam - has won 38/106 starts on the LPGA, just illustrates the lack of competitiveness in comparison with the men's game. I think golf is a very difficult game to dominate to that extent, with so many players starting each tournament and a fair bit down to luck, weather conditions and so forth.
I remember a discussion on snooker where they spoke to female snooker players about whether they'd want to compete against the men - quite a few of them didn't want to, because they were quite protective over the women's game and felt it would make it into a second-class sport. Quite an interesting debate (though slightly OT for the thread, I suppose ).
Michelle Wei did pretty well competing against the men though, particularly when you consider she was only 15 at the time; you don't see a lot of 15 year old boys in men's golf playing as well as she did. I have a feeling she had to stop playing in the end because they weren't happy with her competing, rather than because she wasn't good enough
She's played in something like 8 men's tournaments, missed the cut in 6 of them and withdrew from another with 'heat exhaustion' when she was way off the level needed to make the cut. I think it's reasonable to judge her performances against the men as 'not good enough'.
She's not competing against the men anymore because the novelty has worn off - the invites she relies upon to compete against them have dried up.
If she wants to get onto the men's tour the same way the vast majority of male competitors do then she's quite welcome and I expect she is capable of qualifying for the main tour, but I suspect she'd rather be high profile in the women's game than struggling to retain her tour card in the men's game year in, year out.
I don't think there's any real reason why there couldn't be women competing successfully in the men's game, though.
Comments
I cannot see how this will work especialy if intersex athletes are listed on birth certificates and passports as women.
Also it may be the case that they have more testoterone than the norm for women but less than the norm for men so it seems unlikely that there will ever be a platform on which they are alowed to compete. I don't see how this can be resolved.
What about someone who is genetically entirely female, but has abnormally high levels of testosterone in her body, allowing her a genetic advantage over most other women?
I think the question here is what is it, specifically, that gives Semenya an unfair advantage over other women in the race - are we talking very high levels of testosterone? If so, at least that's something that's objectively measurable (as opposed to, say, 'She's got muscles, so she can't be female :rolleyes:).
The guidelines which allow transsexuals to compete in the Olympics might be a starting point, perhaps, in the absence of any specific guidelines applying to this particular case.
Edit: I see the poster above me has made a similar point
Yes I have no idea how they ought to go about identifying the intersex but once it's come to light, as with Caster, then I believe they should be allowed to compete on the male side.
We separate men and women in most sports because if it was mixed, women would stand no chance. When separate leagues for each gender were created 100s of years ago, I imagine it was more clear-cut to determine men and women.
In the 21st century, we have transsexual people being recognised as their new gender legally and much more knowledge of intersex people.
I don't believe you can make a decision on this specific case without reviewing what we define as 'female' for sporting purposes, why we make that distinction and how.
There's a simple solution, scrap women's sport. If we're all honest it's always played second fiddle to the men's version anyway.
Except netball, women should just play that
Well, the American 100m sprinter, Camelita Jeter, managed to upstage Bolt at the weekend so I won't be voting for a scrap anytime soon
By running the 100m a second slower?
After all, it's clearly not just a question of Semenya being good because she's got both male and female hormones - the vast, vast majority of men could not compete at the same level as top female athletes. There are far more genetic, emotional and environmental advantages going on here than just her gender.
You're probably right that back when the divisions between male and female sport were first created, we didn't know anywhere near as much about the science of gender and the various hormones involved; dividing men and women for the purposes of sport would've been fairly simple (ironically, Semenya would almost certainly have been able to compete as a woman without a problem!). I think this is an interesting case in that it questions our assumptions that the sexes can be very easily and simply divided, which is probably an unsettling idea for many.
I'd argue too that dividing men and women for sport is also a bit of a reassuring reinforcement of gender lines, because it happens even where arguably men have no physical advantage - sports like bowls and snooker, for instance. 15 year old Michelle Wei made a pretty good fist of competing against grown men at golf, before (IIRC?) she was prevented from competing. I'm kind of hoping the Williams sisters decide to take up golf after they're finished with tennis - it'd be very interesting, since I can't imagine either of them being at a physical disadvantage against most of the male golfers!
But there's more to it than just physicality when you're comparing sports like Snooker, Darts and Golf. Men also have better spacial awareness as well as hand-eye coordination which is why when they have entered a women into a man's tournament, like they ried in Golf, they still lose.
I disagree that men inevitably have better spatial awareness than women, too - perhaps you could say that as a general rule, but there are always going to be women who depart from the norm in that respect, and are able to compete alongside men.
In sports like bowls, women are actually now being given more opportunity to compete against men. I played as a teenager, and the reason I quit was that I got so infuriated that the boys would go off to compete in big competitions every month, while us girls had to stay behind in the club and play practice games. I was better than most of the boys, and routinely beat them in club competitions, but I could see that I would fall further and further behind because I didn't have the same opportunities to play against very good players as they did. Thankfully, that's changing now - there's a new system they've brought in at the top level where men and women compete alongside one another, though I don't think it's filtered down to club level yet.
Snooker/bowls/darts are not that dissimilar in terms of the qualities needed to excel in them. Golf is slightly different of course, in that strength is a factor - but in cases where a woman can match the men, as with Michelle Wei, I see no reason why she shouldn't be able to compete alongside them.
I don't think it's possible to say women couldn't compete against men in sports where there are no physical advantages to be had from men being stronger, because girls in general don't have the same opportunities to compete in those sports that men do. Until that changes, and until women are encouraged to play those sports as much as men are, it's impossible to make a true comparison. There may well be certain hormonal or physical advantages to be had for women in some sports that don't require strength - they're not inevitably inferior (women's flexibility is generally superior, for instance).
http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/yeartodate/news05/lpga.html
Yes. To athletics fans, that run was superb
I think it's highly unlikely a woman could ever consistently be right at the top of men's golf, simply because of the strength issue. On the other hand, some of them could probably compete at a pretty decent level, especially when you consider a 60 year old man nearly won the last Open. Reading the article, it's amazing to think that not even Tiger Woods came close as a teenager to making the cut for a major tournament, as Michelle Wei did.
Again, I guess with women's golf generally being played at a far lower level than men's and with it being so much less competitive, it's difficult to compare like with like. The fact one woman - Annika Sorenstam - has won 38/106 starts on the LPGA, just illustrates the lack of competitiveness in comparison with the men's game. I think golf is a very difficult game to dominate to that extent, with so many players starting each tournament and a fair bit down to luck, weather conditions and so forth.
I remember a discussion on snooker where they spoke to female snooker players about whether they'd want to compete against the men - quite a few of them didn't want to, because they were quite protective over the women's game and felt it would make it into a second-class sport. Quite an interesting debate (though slightly OT for the thread, I suppose
She's played in something like 8 men's tournaments, missed the cut in 6 of them and withdrew from another with 'heat exhaustion' when she was way off the level needed to make the cut. I think it's reasonable to judge her performances against the men as 'not good enough'.
She's not competing against the men anymore because the novelty has worn off - the invites she relies upon to compete against them have dried up.
If she wants to get onto the men's tour the same way the vast majority of male competitors do then she's quite welcome and I expect she is capable of qualifying for the main tour, but I suspect she'd rather be high profile in the women's game than struggling to retain her tour card in the men's game year in, year out.
I don't think there's any real reason why there couldn't be women competing successfully in the men's game, though.