Hot Comments
- About time! (5 points, Informative) by sackvillian on Tuesday February 09, @09:50AM attached to Call For Scientific Research Code To Be Released
- Re:Be careful using the P2V tool. (5 points, Informative) by klocwerk on Tuesday February 09, @03:41PM attached to The Hidden Treasures of Sysinternals
- W.A.G. (5 points, Insightful) by ipb on Tuesday February 09, @01:17PM attached to How Do You Accurately Estimate Programming Time?
- Re:Surprise (5 points, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 09, @04:38PM attached to Microsoft Says Windows 7 Not Killing Batteries
- No problem (5 points, Insightful) by rastoboy29 on Wednesday February 10, @05:27AM attached to Appeals Court Rules On Internet Obscenity Standards
5636319
story
Comments: 1091 +- Science: How To Prove Someone Is Female? on Saturday August 22, @04:59PM
Posted
by
kdawson
on Saturday August 22, @04:59PM
from the who-can-replace-a-man dept.
from the who-can-replace-a-man dept.
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicscience.gif); width:62px; height:75px;
science
krou writes "Caster Semenya won the 800m at the World Athletics Championship in blistering style, leaving her competitors in the dust, but she has been thrown into the midst of a scandal amidst claims that she's not really a woman. According to the many press reports, she's believed to shave, is flat chested, has a very masculine physique, previously preferred playing physical games with boys, and shunned traditional female activities and clothing. Questions about her gender have dogged her entire career. Previously, acceptance that she is a women relied on simple inspection of female genitals. But now the IAAF claim that they want to conduct further tests to see if 'she may have a rare medical condition that gives her an unfair advantage.' An IAAF spokesmen noted that 'The [testing] process was started after Semenya made her startling breakthroughs — a 25-second improvement at 1500m and eight seconds at 800m, just some weeks ago.' I'm curious what the Slashdot community thinks: what can be considered proof of someone being male or female? Is it simply a case of having the right genitals, or are there other criteria that should be used? Is the IAAF right in claiming that someone should be prevented from competing because they have a rare medical or genetic advantage?"
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices.
-- William James
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.
Medical advantage (Score:5, Insightful)
"she may have a rare medical condition that gives her an unfair advantage.' "
What kind of bullshit is this? Your genetics are 80% of the winning. Personally, I was born with messed up feet so I have always known that I wouldn't be the sprinting world champion. The fact that this woman(because that's what she is) has the better genetic profile to win these kinds of races is to her advantage and the people who didn't win are to accept that or play another game.
Re:Medical advantage (Score:5, Interesting)
To expand on what you said, if she's banned or pulled back because of her genetic condition, then you can probably expect your gold medal in the mail any day now. Treating people differently for their genetics has a very bad history so far, and sets a bad precedent for the future. Wake me up when the question is about whether someone genetically engineered to be better should compete in the same league as naturals. That's an interesting topic since genetic engineering could be construed as a performance enhancement.
Parent
Re:Medical advantage (Score:5, Informative)
because it's already based entirely on the assumption that to be "fair", we ought to first do some genetic segregation
They allow M2F transgendered persons to compete as women provided they've been on hormone therapy continuously for two or more years -- because it's been proven that hormones have a far greater role in athletic performance than genetics. So genetics is really not the issue here.
Parent
Re:Medical advantage (Score:5, Insightful)
It's especially interesting how outraged people got at the "chauvinistic" attitudes of people "assuming" that better performance means male. They certainly didn't complain about the fact that these events are split up by gender in the first place -- if they don't want questions like this, then simply make one mixed-gender competition, problem solved.
Parent
Re:Medical advantage (Score:5, Insightful)
Ummm yeah! But it's not so rare. It's called being a GUY.
It's going to be unpopular here but I'll say it. That woman is the manliest looking 15 year old female on god's good earth. She walks like a man, talks like a man, has muscles like a man, and the general countenance of a man.
People here are treating her case as if she were clearly a female and so are giving her a lot of leeway to be whatever gender she wants. But they are going to be crying foul play if she turns up a man and she is going to be cast a villain for it.
What a difference gender makes, right folks?
Own up to the gender favoritism, kids. When we think someone is a woman, we make psychological concessions, and any big bad man who suspects she might be male is unfair.
None of the crusaders for her cause to be any gender she desires is thinking of her competitors or of the general concept of fairness.
If she has such spectacular genetics, let her compete with the men.
Parent
Two words: (Score:5, Funny)
Hormones & Sex Change (Score:5, Informative)
If you haven't looked in to the -how- of a sex change, you probably should. It's fascinating.
Turns out its almost all about the action of estrogen and testosterone on the body. Here's how it works:
Before birth: genetics (not the action of testosterone or estrogen) drive the construction of male or female genitalia along with testicles, prostate, uterus and ovaries. The bodies otherwise develop pretty much exactly the same.
Before puberty: still nothing. Get a boy and a girl both five years old, cut their hair the same and dress them in the same clothes. You won't be able to tell which is which. Except for the genitalia, their bodies are virtually identical.
Puberty: Boys and girls begin producing significant quantities of testosterone or estrogen. Under the action of testosterone, boys gain an extra several inches of height.
Any time: under the action of testosterone, the voice deepens, facial hair appears, body hair becomes coarse and soft tissues redistribute and redevelop towards the abdomen in particular and towards what's considered to be the male figure in general. Under the action of estrogen, the mammaries develop, body hair becomes soft and soft tissue redistributes towards the thighs and the so-called "hourglass figure." And of course if she actually has a uterus then she begins to menstruate.
Note that if you artificially introduce testosterone and estrogen before puberty, the changes start early, typically to the detriment of the girl or boy whose body isn't yet ready.
The appearance of facial hair, the voice drop and the development of the mammaries are permanent features. Skeletal height is also permanent after puberty; you won't add inches by introducing testosterone in your 30s. Once developed these characteristics can only be surgically altered. The soft tissue distribution and body hair character alters under the effect of the two chemicals, so if you change the chemical balance those features will alter.
Post menopause/ed: in the absence of significant amounts of testosterone and estrogen, body hair and figure tend towards a neutral configuration. That's why grandma and grandpa start to look alike.
So, someone undergoing a sex change takes two daily pills: one to block the action of the undesired chemical (estrogen or testosterone) and one which provides the missing chemical. Do this for about a year and 90% of the change is accomplished... From a fully clothed perspective you generally can't tell the difference except that the woman is oddly tall or the man oddly short. In fact, given the expense and risk of the final SRS surgery (versus the sub-$50/month cost of the pills), more than a few trans simply stop there, satisfied with an outward appearance and lifestyle that matches their self-image.
Now apparently the sports officials suspect something more unusual than just tampering with body chemistry is going on here. There's a very rare birth defect in which an individual who is genetically male incorrectly grows female genitalia. They lack ovaries and a uterus. The testicles are still connected but they're up in the abdomen and mostly non-functional. Generally the first time anyone even suspects the individual isn't genetically female is when they reach puberty and the testicles start putting out testosterone. The girl adds 6 inches in a growth spurt, spouts fuzz on her face, loses an octave in her voice and pads her bra. Very embarrassing.
Asks for directions? (Score:5, Funny)
Same happend in 1950 with Foekje Dillema (Score:5, Interesting)
From wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foekje_Dillema [wikipedia.org]
"In 1950 Dillema was expelled for life by the Dutch National Athletics Federations. A gynaecologist concluded that Dillema was an intersex."
"In 2008, a controversial DNA-test on dead cells from her clothing found that she may have been a Genetic Mosaic, having both 46XX (female) and 46XY (male) chromosomes in approximately a 3 to 1 ratio. "
Re:Same happend in 1950 with Foekje Dillema (Score:5, Funny)
Her name was Dilemma?
Parent
WTF? Sour grapes (Score:5, Interesting)
For fook sake...if someone is born with a vagina and they haven't taken drugs or gotten surgery to get there, they are a woman.
To try to weed someone out of the athletic process because God (or whatever you believe in) has given them "a little extra" is absurd.
Are we going to treat the Olympics like a dog show and start delving into genetics and "quality of their coat" and all the other BS nitpicks that people use to judge dogs in order to allow people to compete in sports? Absent an obvious attempt at cheating, I find this whole line of "testing" to be repulsive.
Re:Obvious solution (Score:5, Funny)
If you can make love to her, then she is a woman (provided that you know where you put your willy in)...
... or, if she uses the term "make love" for the act, she is a woman.
Parent
Re:Obvious solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Simple... if "Y" chromosome found = male (Score:5, Informative)
[citation needed]
Every reference I could fine indicated that Klinefelter's Syndrome was considered "males born with extra chromosome". Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] is just one, but everything else I found thru Google on "xxy chromosome" referred to the people born with this condition as "male".
Can you site a reference otherwise?
Parent
Re:Simple... if "Y" chromosome found = male (Score:5, Insightful)
And additionally, the obnoxious notion of "fairness" further complicates the issue.
When issues like these come up, I'm always reminded of Harrison Bergeron [westvalley.edu]
Parent
Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Interesting)
Considering that there are plenty of creatures which can be hermaphrodites, and that there are rare genetic variations (YXYY, for example) where one is born with e.g. male characteristics while the sexual organs may be female, this is a difficult point. Where do you draw the line? I know of a few lesbians who, except for the chest, could easily pass for male: large arms and hands, low voice, etc.
The sexual differences are fairly pronounced for "normal" men and women, but there are plenty of in-betweens. Methinks the only thing they can do is make an extensive study of all the differences between men and women, and say that if more than an x number of variables lean towards the one or the other, the person in question must be considered as being of the opposite sex. Either that, or you have to create the Hermaphrodite Olympics. They'll probably still have to investigate each case separately either way.
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Funny)
Right? Look at any NBA center. Shaq, for example, has a rare genetic condition causing him to be a fucking giant and giving him an unfair advantage over me, a 6'1" 190 lb. dude. Should he be allowed to play professional basketball? Of course.
The NBA considered denying him permission to play, but the decision fell apart when it was realized that no one had the balls to tell Shaq about it.
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
So she has a rare genetic makeup, doesn't every world class athlete have a rare genetic makeup? I consider myself ordinary male and I can't do most of the stuff even a female Olympic athlete can.
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
What this whole argument has thus far ignored is the fact that athletes need at least as much if not more mental strength and inherent talent than physical strength. What she has accomplished has at least as much to do with her mind as her body.
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
Also I think you have to define it genetically otherwise people that have a sex change could compete as the sex they want to.
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Insightful)
Go read about androgen insensitivity syndrome [wikipedia.org]. A person with complete androgen insensitivity has the external appearance (including external genitals) of a normal female, and usually has been raised with a female identity, and so identifies as a girl or woman. But she has no menstrual period because she has no ovaries or uterus -- she has an XY genotype and undescended internal testes. Androgens (male hormones) create the male external appearance; in the absence of androgens, a fetus develops a female appearance -- and parents and society assign a female identity.
It seems to me that a reasonable approach to dealing fairly with intersexed people in sports would be to replace sex separation with weight-class separation. Human sex and gender turn out to be complex and fraught with both social and technical problems, and it is unreasonable to deny an athlete the chance to compete just because their genetic curiosity happens to be on the 23rd chromosome.
Parent
Re:Bloody difficult. (Score:5, Informative)
"Someone who is XY or XX" is also not well-defined. Mosaicism [wikipedia.org] is a condition where an individual has some XY cells, and others XX. Where do you draw the line for the individual to be a male? Does "he" have to have 50+% XY cells, 90+%, 99+% ?
And what about the XYY syndrome [wikipedia.org]? Some question whether the term "syndrome" is even appropriate because most individuals with XYY cells don't even know it as they appear to be regular healthy males. They don't have to take drugs, which defeats your first argument. Given that 1 in 1000 boys have this syndrome, it is probable that some athletes who won "male" competition have this syndrome. If we were to have these persons genetically tested today, would you retroactively strip them from their titles?
This whole male/female question is not as trivial as it looks like.
Parent
Re:Genetic (Score:5, Insightful)
I would also use this occasion to state my amusement to see these sports officials embarrassed about someone having a clear advantage that can not be put on special training, drugs, equipment or techniques. At a high level, performances in sports like athletics will show differences that can have a clear genetic cause (that's okay. That is, after all, a feature of evolution, that some individual will outperform others on specific tasks) yet refuse to acknowledge it and emphasize on the training and work of athletes.
Athletes keep talking about sports' spirit, about how it is all about fairness and balance. I am happy to see some reminders that top competitions are mostly about unfair genetic advantage. This focus on the top 1st, the gold medal, the world champion, is a bit insane. The most respectable difference I see in sport is between amateur and well-trained. Between these two levels, the difference is clear and is mostly about efforts. But it is not very convenient or spectacular to build a mediafest around.
Parent
Re:Genetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Genetic variants? By many accounts, China outright fabricated passports for some of their prepubescent gymnasts in the last olympics. After an initial hand flapping, that got ignored. But some poor girl who (apparently through no fault of her own) has some natural advantage is being punished. That is simply crazy.
Parent
Re:Gender isn't sex. (Score:5, Insightful)
And lastly, I'd like to believe that as a community that espouses scientific values and intelligent discourse, the answer should be obvious:...
Bad girlintrainig! You never, ever, EVER presume that just because someone is smart and intelligent they should agree with you -- or that, just because someone disagrees with you, they're either not smart or not intelligent.
I'd say it's far more scientific to brand gender and sex as immutable based on your genetics than to relegate it to subjective measurements And on that note...
Life is full of delicious ambiguity, and people assume that two polar opposites (male and female) have nothing in between. But life isn't like that. Life is a spectrum, and any place we draw the line is arbitrary -- not natural. Nature has its own laws, which are not the laws of men.,
A female is an organism that can produce an ova to create young during its lifespan. A male is an organism that can create sperm to fertilize said Ova during its lfiespan. This is not arbitrary -- this is the scientific definition from biology. Any organism that can do neither of those two during its lifespan is neuter, and any that can do both is hemaphroditic (sic). ANY OTHER DEFINITION is cultural, subjective, non-scientific crap.
Parent
Re:Gender isn't sex. (Score:5, Insightful)
He already said that someone who couldn't produce either is a neuter.
He already said that someone who couldn't produce either is a neuter.
I realise you don't buy into that definition, which is fine, but it is a waste of time asking a stupid question that has nothing to do with what he was saying.
And even if you were genuinely curious about his answer to those two questions, you'd still need to clarify - after all, when we cut the nuts off a male dog, we say it's been neutered. And at what point is this surgery done? At birth before any eggs or sperm have been produced? Are they adult? You don't care about the answers (neither do I) - you're just engaging in a really silly argument.
His statement is essentially nine plus nine equals eighteen. And you're arguing that this is incorrect because it's not true if we're using base eight in which neither nine or eighteen exists.
Parent
Re:Gender isn't sex. (Score:5, Funny)
Nature has its own laws, which are not the laws of men.
Exactly, they are the laws of women.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Interesting)
According to the venerable BBC report on the subject, it isn't as simple as all that. While the vast majority of us possess chromosomes in the traditional formations XX and XY, there exist some 25 OTHER possible arrangements, which, taking into account a variety of other factors, can lead to an even larger possible selection of physical effects and outcomes.
The vast majority of us aren't in rigorous physical competition, and so might never know if we are one of these "intersex" conditions. If she of TFA does, how do you interpret the results?
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Informative)
It's not so simple.
It's possible to be born with both an X and Y chromosome, but have all the physical traits of a female. There's a few ways a Y can be "defective".
It wouldn't be fair to force such people to compete with the men, because they've got the body mass/strength/endurance/etc of typical XX humans despite having a Y.
As in most things in life, the edge cases make it really hard to come up with a simple rule that's fair to everyone involved.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Informative)
Indeed. In fact, for example, XY women with CAIS (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) are not only phenotpically female, but tend to be *weaker* and *less* masculinized than normal XX women.
It's not the X chromosome or Y chromsome that's the key. There's this whole cascade of reactions that lead to prenatal masculinization/feminization. This is started off by the complex SRY (Sex Region Y), which is normally found on the Y chromosome. But it can be defective. Or it can migrate to the X chromosome. And even if it's perfectly normal, what about each subsequent step in the cascade? For example, AIS women produce androgens, but their body just ignores them.
And then there's some of the really weird cases, like 5 alpha reductace deficiency syndrome. It's also called "guevedoche" in the parts of the Dominican Republic where it's unusually common. Guevedoche means "balls at twelve", and yes, it's like it sounds. A child is born, sometimes phenotypically intersexed, but sometimes seemingly a perfectly normal female. But when "she" hits puberty, "she" grows body hair, testes descend, the clitoris develops into a micropenis, and on and on. They usually develop a male gender identity, and in some cases, they can even father children.
Gender is not as simple as we'd like to pretend. Did you know that your average man can lactate? I'm dead serious. Men have undeveloped breasts, including undeveloped mammary glands. Take estrogen for a year or two (to trigger breast development), then take a large dose of domperidone for two weeks. Domperidone inhibits dopamine levels (outside the brain; it doesn't cross the brain-blood barrier, so it doesn't lower brain dopamine). Dopamine inhibits prolactin production, so dropping its levels stimulates the production of prolactin, which stimulates the production of breast milk.
We're all made of the same body parts, just with different degrees of development and activation of them.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only is the genetics of sexuality complicated, scientists haven't even identified all the genes.
Even worse, they identified a lot of genes that turned out to wrong.
Remember USP9Y? That's the gene that's supposed to be responsible for loss of sperm production in deletions of the AZFa region -- the balls of the AZFa region, as it were.
The New England Journal of Medicine had a report last February of a man who had the whole USP9Y gene deleted, and still was able to produce sperm. In fact, his father had the same USP9Y deletion.
You can divide the genes that determine human sexuality into two groups. One group determines the form that genitals take. The other group determines all the other physical and psychological aspects of sexuality. Conceptually, it's easy to see how someone could develop with female genitals and everything else male. That doesn't mean that anyone has identified it as a syndrome, much less the genes and protein-level mechanisms.
I assume they'll give Caster Semenya a karyotyping, FISH, and test for every known gene involved with sexual development. Maybe they'll find an abnormality, and maybe they won't.
But that won't answer the question. Is somebody female because she has female genitals, XX karyotype, some arbitrary sex-determining genes, female hormones, female body type, or female reproductive ability? Gender is a social construct, not a lab test.
(BTW, I think the New Scientist had an article on this subject of sex tests for athletes a few years ago.)
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Informative)
What if it turns out she is in fact intersexed? Should she be banned from competing as a woman?
Intersexed people are not so rare. XXY, XX males, and XY females do exist. True hermaphrodites are less common, but again, not as rare as you would think. In my case, I am a true hermaphrodite, have CAH and both XX and XY genes (genetic mosaicism), which leads doctors to believe I absorbed a twin in-utero. As I get older I am unfortunately becoming more androgynous.
I had severe migraines my whole life, was ALWAYS hungry (I could eat an entire sub, a large candy bar, drink a coke, and still be hungry) - and could not gain weight no matter how much I ate. I went for all kinds of testing and one doctor mentioned my adrenals "are a little off" and when I asked what that meant he said it's not a big deal. Years later, I went through a very stressful situation and my adrenal glands finally decided to really act up. I gained 60lbs within six months and developed facial hair growth. I hated doctors by that point (being intersexed they wanted to use me as a guinea pig and get published, making names for themselves) so I didn't get checked out until a couple of years went by and things got so bad I was getting 3-4 migraines a week, went from bad-tempered to downright bitchy (read: batshit insane! ;)), and had severe heart pain. I finally got checked out by a cardiac physiologist friend (who had been telling me I have adrenal issues all along and had to get all soy out of my diet) who checked with a specialist friend of his after pulling my medical records, and confirmed the CAH suspicions. Why didn't my doctors catch that? The problem is now that my adrenals are functioning so poorly I gain weight easily.
Within a couple of days of eliminating soy from my diet, the jaundice, migraines, fatigue, insomnia, heart palpitations (and resultant pain), and my behavioral issues disappeared completely. Now I don't get migraines unless I accidentally (or on rare occasion knowingly) ingest soy (vegetable oil, vegetable protein, vegetable shortening, etc.. all contain soy proteins). My mood changed and I no longer had a quick temper. It turns out I had a slight soy allergy and a severe intolerance. The intolerance comes from the SW/CAH.
For my adrenal condition now doctors want to put me on corticosteroids, which will make me even more andgrogynous. I won't do that. So, what I decided to do instead was to adjust my diet to include a LOT more cholesterol, and a lot more salt (for the electrolyte imbalance). The extra cholesterol provides my adrenal glands with more cortisol precursors so that they can manufacture a little more cortisol, eliminating the need for injections.
Taking in a lot more cholesterol eliminated the kidney pain (my adrenals were irritating my kidneys), and eliminated the constant hunger feeling. Before then, I never knew what it was like to not feel hunger pangs.
Doctors often coerce parents to choose one sex over the other, in the name of profit. Peforming those "corrective" surgeries on infants is profitable, and they encourage parents to hide it from their children. In many cases, doctors don't even inform the parents of the causes of the intersex condition, and/or don't describe it as an intersex/hermaphroditic condition but as an "anomoly" which is intentionally vague. Unfortunately, in the case of children with CAH or PAIS, hiding those problems and not informing their children of their health condition can often lead to future health and societal problems.
Had I known then what I knew now (I knew of the cosmetic situation when I was a child, but was never informed of the underlying causes - and neither were my parents) I'd have known to avoid soy, keep my electrolytes up, and eat extra cholesterol. On top of that, avoiding the temper issues would have allowed me to advance my career even more quickly than I did before I left the corporate life (I had a severe dislike for corporate politics because it irritated me. Now I'd welcome it and play the game, knowing
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Interesting)
Interesting post you wrote. I'm transgendered, and I, meaning I personally, didn't choose to be trans. Trans is something I am, not that I pay attention to those HBSers who call themselves brain-intersexed that annoy you IS people so much. I didn't choose to be trans, but how I respond to trans and act upon my trans...that is the choice.
I've been touched by IS too, and my genito-urinary system has given me trouble since I was young. Had a nice perineal urethrotomy in late spring to bypass all that. But I don't identify as IS, since, again, I know how IS folk feel about what they see as some transfolk trying to appropriate the IS identity and I had read about transgender stuff before I even knew I was IS. Doctors had never explained my problems to my parents and never ever used the word hypospadias. I was curious when my problems started getting worse a few years back and went back to the hospital and asked for my old records as a kid (when they tried to fix my recurring meatal stenosis and urethral strictures....twice)
Parent
It's not a choice for us "trannies" either (Score:5, Insightful)
I have persistent thoughts of hoping I die because I feel very strongly that I need to be a woman. I shy away from mirrors in self-disgust. I have to avoid seeing women in general or I will start to get jealous of them. I hate my life.
Why would i choose this?
Parent
Should Women Compete Separately At All? (Score:5, Insightful)
To answer the question of whether or not she should be allowed to compete as a female if she is not 100% female, one must first consider the question of whether women should be competing in a separate class at all.
Let's avoid the underlying moral and philosophical issues and just stick with the practical reason for setting things up so women compete separately: approximately 50% of the population is female, so it is a political necessity. You can argue all sorts of other reasons, but when it really comes down to it, that is the crux of it.
And if you really think about it, we don't actually have women competing against women in one group and men competing against men in another group. What we REALLY have is women competing against women in one group, and EVERYONE ELSE competing in another group. Men are not set up as a protected class, it is only women who are set up as a protected class. If a sufficiently gifted female runner wanted to compete against men, I very much suspect that she'd be allowed to do so.
Once you realize the reality that female sports are basically a protected class based on a political reality, the answer to the other question becomes pretty simple: anyone who is not 100% female is not part of the "protected class" and should therefore compete in the "everyone else" category.
Is it fair? Maybe not. But how is having women compete separately "fair" in the first place? It is just for political expediency, and personally I don't see anything wrong with it if it keeps 50% of the population happier and more fulfilled than they otherwise would be without causing any undue hardship on a significant part of the population.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
If one wants to compete, they have to take a test. If they don't consent, they don't compete. This is not a violation of rights because there is no necessity or right to compete.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Informative)
What they need is not called a DNA sequence, it's a karyotype [wikipedia.org]. In other words, they look at her chromosomes, without looking at the actual sequence of base-pairs. That's better than a DNA sequence b/c you're only looking at what her chromosomes are, not what her actual genes are--and it's a hell of a lot more private than asking her to show people her genitals.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Athletes, the Track & Field ones, are already required to piss in a cup for drug testing. The results of which will eventually be published for a positive test. DNA testing is just an extrapolation of an existing process. From the IAAF's perspective participants have no right to hide their sexual identity. Don't like the rules? go form your own organization. Vince McMahon will tell you that's a dumb idea (re: XFL with no drug tests). You want to talk about privacy invasion, try looking at the list of drugs which aren't allowed in an athlete's system and see how many you may have in your medicine cabinet. The majority of cough medicines are verboten. The right question isn't so much about privacy as much as it is how a governing organization should go about sanctioning a fair competition.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, that's right. I forgot there's only two options and no possibility of deviation from those options AT ALL.
Fucking moron.
Since in the vast majority of cases, it really is one of those two options - it seems like the logical first step, given that invasive testing is apparently already the norm for track and field anymore. If Caster's test shows XX or XY, either way the case is closed. Arguing that a remote possibility of a different genetic state exists means you can't first test for the heavily dominant typical state is, quite frankly, silly. That's like arguing that a doctor shouldn't do an influenza test on a patient with flu-like symptoms because there's a remote possibility it's Brucellosis.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the most surefire way is to see if her gametes can play their respective roll. If they can manage to form a viable embryo from her egg, case closed. If not, some more testing would be needed. Also, a genetic advantage is the reason most athletes get the gold. If she has a rare/new trait, what are you going to do when a larger percentage of the population has it in the future? It's just as discriminatory to ban them now as it would be later. Especially if it's a naturally acquired trait.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Funny)
No, we must stop the mutants.
Test for presence of the X-gene and detain them if they test positive.
At least disqualify them from athletic competition for starters.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Funny)
The first clue was when she kept leaving the toilet seat up.
Parent
Re:I can do the opposite (Score:5, Funny)
If you ever posted here, you know you are not a REAL female. You may even look like one, but you know, deep inside, you have big question mark lingering. Don't you!
Nope. Still got tits. I think the problem is on your end.
Parent
Re:Make them write some code (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, this is going to be pretty hard on the women, since they get the short end of the genetic stick regarding certain physical traits. But there are many, many MEN that cannot compete with either the men or the women in certain sports. Statistically, there are nearly as many men that cannot compete with the best male athletes as there are females that cannot compete with the best male athletes. And as an average man I know I would have no chance against many female athletes.
I understand that the idea of a female league/sport/category for sports is something that a lot of people want, but things like TFA's quandary are just rule quibbles. There's nothing like "Oh, she was faster, but she's not really a she so it doesn't count". If she was faster, she was fucking faster, just like all the male athletes that are faster and you exclude from your league to give it a reason to exist.
Parent