Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
Semenya loses appeal at CAS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bill" data-source="post: 942734" data-attributes="member: 79436"><p>Oh come on, this is ridiculous.</p><p></p><p>Firstly, there's no equivalence with bolt and phelps. Semeneya wouldn't be told to shorten her legs or her feet, or change whatever other advantages bolt and phelps have. Semenya's additional attributes, are something which are at odds with the very definition of the eligibility requirements for the events in which she is competing. </p><p></p><p>Secondly, it's absurd to blame IAAF for being unable to categorise her as male or female. The IAAF aren't to blame for the athlete having mixed genitalia. Categorising her into male or female is EXACTLY what they are effectively doing, by clarifying the eligibility criteria for womens' events. Of course the result of those clarifications will result in potential discrimination, because without discriminating the events can't exist. It's up to the IAAF to determine where they will put that discriminatory line, and they have chosen to put it where it excludes people who have both male and female attributes. That's entirely up to them, and is the very obvious choice, as otherwise the vast majority of people with attributes of being a woman could not compete competitively. Semenya isn't - as she claims - being prevented from running, she isn't even being prevented from competing (as someone else correctly pointed out), she is being prevented from competing in events for which is biologically ineligible. </p><p></p><p>Unlike any similar athletes before her though, she has been given the option to take advantage of the advances in science which enable her to change her biology in order to make her eligible, should she so choose. To me the remarkable thing here isn't that she is being told she can only compete with reduced testosterone, it's that there's a way in which she is being allowed to compete in a womens' race whilst having male genitalia. This is being looked at as an act of discrimination. In fact, it's just as easy to look at it the other way and regard it as an incredible effort to avoid discriminating. The IAAF have handled it in an examplary manner imo, and deserve enormous credit, not only for making the event fair for biological women, but for opening it up to those who previously would never have been able to.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bill, post: 942734, member: 79436"] Oh come on, this is ridiculous. Firstly, there's no equivalence with bolt and phelps. Semeneya wouldn't be told to shorten her legs or her feet, or change whatever other advantages bolt and phelps have. Semenya's additional attributes, are something which are at odds with the very definition of the eligibility requirements for the events in which she is competing. Secondly, it's absurd to blame IAAF for being unable to categorise her as male or female. The IAAF aren't to blame for the athlete having mixed genitalia. Categorising her into male or female is EXACTLY what they are effectively doing, by clarifying the eligibility criteria for womens' events. Of course the result of those clarifications will result in potential discrimination, because without discriminating the events can't exist. It's up to the IAAF to determine where they will put that discriminatory line, and they have chosen to put it where it excludes people who have both male and female attributes. That's entirely up to them, and is the very obvious choice, as otherwise the vast majority of people with attributes of being a woman could not compete competitively. Semenya isn't - as she claims - being prevented from running, she isn't even being prevented from competing (as someone else correctly pointed out), she is being prevented from competing in events for which is biologically ineligible. Unlike any similar athletes before her though, she has been given the option to take advantage of the advances in science which enable her to change her biology in order to make her eligible, should she so choose. To me the remarkable thing here isn't that she is being told she can only compete with reduced testosterone, it's that there's a way in which she is being allowed to compete in a womens' race whilst having male genitalia. This is being looked at as an act of discrimination. In fact, it's just as easy to look at it the other way and regard it as an incredible effort to avoid discriminating. The IAAF have handled it in an examplary manner imo, and deserve enormous credit, not only for making the event fair for biological women, but for opening it up to those who previously would never have been able to. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
Semenya loses appeal at CAS
Top