• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    113
    ·
    3 months ago

    The claim is not that she was initially considered to be a man by the Algerian government and then changed her public identity to that of a woman, but rather that she has some sort of intersex condition that elevates her testosterone levels into the masculine range.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        67
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Seriously. Phelps is pretty much genetically ideal for a swimmer, but nobody claimed it was “UnfAiR!!” when he swept the board multiple olympics in a row, garnering more gold medals than anyone in history, before or since.

        One female boxer looks a bit “too” muscular and the bigots are up in arms. Fucking assholes.

      • sudneo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is honestly an argument that I find very weak. I mean absolutely there are plenty of genetic advantages in general in sport. The problem is that not all sports have categories to isolate competitions for certain parameters. Swimming does not, so you could argue that is unfair by default, but that’s what it is right now. Fighting sports generally do have categories, both gender and weight.

        If we leave alone gender, if someone had some condition (let’s imagine something that doesn’t exist) that would result in having muscle mass common for a 80Kg, but in a 70Kg body, that person would probably have an unfair advantage in the 70Kg category because weight is a proxy for muscle mass as well.

        The only reasonable argument here is that the boxer, even if she has some genetic condition, still tested within the limits for female boxers. That is pretty much it, which means that whatever condition she has (if any), it’s not considered an advantage in the female category according to current standards.

      • bassomitron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Was it him or Lance Armstrong that ended up getting caught doping? Pretty sure it was the latter, but also recall Phelps getting accused of something. If could’ve even been something irrelevant like marijuana.

        Agree with your point, though.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        What’s interesting is Katie Ledecky can beat him on long distance swims, if we go by their times. So how much of an advantage is gender in many sports at this level? And let’s look at disability - Usain Bolt had/has scoliosis, Ledecky has POTS, and many other athletes have “disabling” conditions. So why would intersex get a special category that isn’t allowed? It’s just transphobia.

        Here’s a source for Katie Ledecky beating Phelps: https://www.essentiallysports.com/us-sports-news-olympics-news-swimming-news-is-katie-ledecky-faster-than-michael-phelps-answering-the-burning-question-of-the-swimming-community-before-us-olympic-trials/

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Looking at the other comments, you are clearly not here to discuss, but I will make a good faith attempt and play devil’s advocate.

          The difference between intersex and other conditions you mentioned is that it blurs the lines of a specific set of parameters that are specifically used to create categories between sports. Men and women are not fighting each other for more than anagraphic reasons (I hope we can all agree on this), and if a condition invalidates that distinction (I.e. gives some advantages that men have over a women), then it breaks the boundary of such categories in a similar way as it would be having someone from a heavier category fight in a lighter one (BTW, this is routinely done by having athletes go in terrible dehydration regimes).

          Now this has nothing to do with this specific case, as there is no any objective proof for any of this, nor that she is intersex nor that she does have any advantage, but it’s purely a way to frame the answer to the question “what’s the difference between having scoliosis and being intersex”.

          Edit:

          I will add one more thing, comparing a sprinter to a long-distance swimmer is exactly like comparing someone who runs 100m with those who run marathons. Clearly there is an advantage, considering that Katie Ledecky is an absolute monster, but she would have beaten the 3 worse times only that men did in this Olympics, and that she would have been almost a minute behind the winner, meaning almost 2 full lengths. Of course men have an advantage…also if you took the time from https://www.worldaquatics.com/athletes/1001621/michael-phelps, you probably have seen that he was 15 at the time…

          • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            The thing is, other hormones can give advantages too. That people put so much stock into testosterone alone is bad science. That intersex conditions that involve testosterone are so hated is transphobia. Women should be in their neat little boxes and men in theirs and any anatomy that changes that is taboo and should be banned. Like where should an intersex fighter compete? If this woman was intersex and had LOCAH or PCOS or other conditions, should she not be allowed in any division of Olympics?

            Why don’t we have testosterone classes instead of (or in addition to) weight classes, if it matters so much? All athletes with the same level of testosterone can compete, just like athletes that weigh the same compete against each other. Why dont we organize it that way instead? Isn’t that more exact and fair?

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I didn’t mention testosterone at all. I am not a specialist and I mostly don’t care about the details. I specifically talked in functional terms: if whatever condition gives you some advantages that men have, then it breaks the categories that are established. In this way, that condition would be different from -say- having huge feet like Phelps, even if they give you an advantage, because there are no categories based on foot size in swimming.

              Everything else is an interesting hypothetical discussion, and maybe one day categories will be based on more parameters. Fact is, today they are like this, rough and using proxies such as gender and weight to make fights that are more-or-less fair.

              • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Well, everyone else here is specifically talking about testosterone. That’s the “problematic” chemical. It’s relevant because it’s a normal endogenous chemical we make and some women naturally make more. It can help with more muscle mass and bone density. That it’s testosterone is entirely relevant.

                That’s like speaking on Gaza and saying “it doesn’t matter where it is.” Like yes it absolutely matters. The context and specifics matter when discussing complicated topics.

                All athletes that beat other athletes have a presumed physical advantage. A physical advantage isn’t an issue. It’s testosterone that’s the issue according to the people bitching about it.

                • sudneo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  A physical advantage isn’t an issue. It’s testosterone that’s the issue according to the people bitching about it.

                  No, it’s a physical advantages that derive from a condition that renders certain parameters (whatever they are) similar to stronger categories (in this case, men).

                  If it’s just testosterone or a combination of hormones and other things it doesn’t matter in the perspective of the discussion I was trying to have (which answered your question, by the way)…

                  So why would intersex get a special category that isn’t allowed?

                  • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    But that’s literally every condition. Thats everything a top physical athlete has - their entire physique is a physical advantage over others. How is it different than say, Michael Phelps producing less lactic acid which allows him to have greater endurance? Why is lactic acid okay to be different with, but not testosterone? Both are genetic abnormalities that confer an advantage.

                    The reason is that they can’t be transphobic about lactic acid.

                  • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I’ve already provided multiple examples where the physical advantages, resulting from a neurochemical anomaly, exist and no one had an issue. Why is testosterone special? And if testosterone ISN’T special, then why aren’t they testing for other enodgenous neurochemicals like lactic acid and banning based on that? Why doesn’t this group of lactic acid anomalies get kicked out and refused placement?

                    Again, it’s transphobia.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      She is a woman who was born a woman and happens to have high testosterone for a woman, just like some people are taller than others. She just happens to be at one end of the testosterone spectrum.

      Just because you want baseless rumors to be true doesn’t make them true.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          “Higher than average.” Hence the upper body muscles being larger that average for a female boxer.

          It isn’t rocket surgery.

          • 0laura@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            wrong. the IBA said they never did any testosterone tests. feel free to disprove me, but to my knowledge there is 0 evidence even hinting at her having high T

              • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Oh, they must just have gotten her “hIgEr ThAn AvErAgE” testosterone results from the Olympic village psychic. I must have been silly to assume that saying it’s higher than average meant someone tested rather than you just pulling bullshit out of your ass.

                • snooggums@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You say it like it is a bad thing to acknowledge that people have differences in their biology.

            • legion02@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              25
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              Why would they ever make that known to the public. Would be a huge invasion of the competitors privacy. Kinda weird.

              • diablexical@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                3 months ago

                Its part of wada rules to which the ioc is compliant? Drug test results for these organization are often published, at least they are for my powerlifting org

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      There seems to be little credible hard evidence on either side, so anyone claiming to know the real truth here is just talking out of their ass.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        46
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s the point I was originally trying to make. This article is written as if the question has been conclusively answered, but it hasn’t been.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Her testosterone treated within the allowed range.

    • Gerudo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      The genetic issue she has is in 1in 600 people. Not exactly rare