Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 10 of 67 FirstFirst ... 891011122060 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 663
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,357
    Quote Originally Posted by trackCanuck View Post
    What was being addressed was an insinuation that the IAAF is not really concerned with being fair. This entire issue is about fairness, in the form of a level playing field in events where certain athletes have a distinct and addressable advantage. It is not about anything else, like going after Semenya because they have an issue with her in particular. To hint at that, as many writers do, is hogwash and a diversion from the real matter. So yes they can wait til hell freezes over to apply the rules in the pole vault, and the field will be leveled in the events currently being dealt with.

    I don't know why they haven't applied it yet in field events, but I don't know of any athlete that has drawn scrutiny in the pole vault and hammer.
    Do you read what you write before you post it?

    You've effectively just proven my point: that this is unfair because it is TARGETED. Their own research showed it affected the PV and HT but they chose not to implement the T limits in those events precisely because they ARE 'gong after Semenya'. If this was an honest, fair piece of research then they would act on it and implement the T limitations on the events their research showed it impacted.

    And, brilliantly, the World Medical Association has asked doctors to refuse to implement the new IAAF regulations due to reservations about ethical validity and the fact that "such research associated with unproven interventions must follow a research protocol approved and monitored by an appropriate, independent ethics committee".

    Also amusing was some of @Scienceofsports comments, about the paradox of T only effecting events from 400m to 1mile...if true it disproves the conceptual theory model at the heart of the IAAF argument, and if false, the regulations have no evidence base"...
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #92
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,357
    Quote Originally Posted by trackCanuck View Post
    This kind of reasoning makes leaps that put Beamon to shame. This is why I said it is so disappointing to see gay/trans commentators almost to a person completely blinded and either unable and/or unwilling to stop viewing everything through these lenses that most of the time are entirely irrelevant and grossly distorting of the issue.
    What on earth do trans and gay commentators have to do with this? Why would you call them out in particular? Have you been determining the sexuality of each commentator?

    Another person showing their true colours. You disappoint me, son. I thought you were better then that.

    The fact that you cannot understand why social commentators would discuss this ground breaking ruling from a sociological perspective...well, I have no words.

    If you really think this is only about 'biology' and 'sport' then you are extremely na´ve.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, CO
    Posts
    7,620
    So what should be the criteria to compete in women's events?

    Self-identify as a woman? A Bruce Jenner could simply say "I'm a woman" and score 10,000 points (or whatever) in the heptathlon.

    Have a vagina? A male--let's use Jenner again--then goes to Trinidad, Colorado and has gender reassignment surgery and scores 10,000 points in the heptathlon.

    Be born with a vagina? Well, here we are, external female genitalia but with testicles and a testosterone level of a male. Essentially male physiology but with a vagina.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #94
    Quote Originally Posted by beebee View Post
    This is the sports equivalent of forcing a trans person use the restroom that YOU feel they should use.
    I laughed because I can't tell if you are trolling or trying to create a twitter meme or are actually serious.

    Either way, I can't debate based on emotions. I focus on science. Even when it comes to deciding who should use which facility, I would defer to the Science
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella2 View Post
    Do you read what you write before you post it?

    You've effectively just proven my point: that this is unfair because it is TARGETED. Their own research showed it affected the PV and HT but they chose not to implement the T limits in those events precisely because they ARE 'gong after Semenya'. If this was an honest, fair piece of research then they would act on it and implement the T limitations on the events their research showed it impacted.
    You are surmising that this is the case. You do not know that there is malice toward Semenya and she is being targeted. You have declared that is the case, without proof. Your opinion does not equate to proof, though you are never so modest as to stop trying to pull that nonsense with everyone.
    Last edited by trackCanuck; 05-02-2019 at 05:42 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella2 View Post
    What on earth do trans and gay commentators have to do with this? Why would you call them out in particular? Have you been determining the sexuality of each commentator?

    Another person showing their true colours. You disappoint me, son. I thought you were better then that.
    I have read commentary by many gay and trans writers as this issue has unfolded over the past few years. Every time I read the same thing : this is a horrendous abuse of human rights, it's racist, sexist, this-ist and that-ist, yada yada, yippidy day. You know nothing about my true colors, because I have told you nothing. And I'm not your 'son', old girl. More of the same from the poster who once opined that Wilma Rudolph may have been on steroids.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #97
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, CO
    Posts
    7,620
    She's being "targeted" because she was found to have sky-high, male testosterone levels. Presumably other women are not being targeted--say, Emma Coburn, for example--because they do not have sky-high, male testosterone levels. I would hope if some steepler runs 8:45 this year and is found to have sky-high, male testosterone levels, or some high jumper jumps 6-9 and is found to have sky-high, male testosterone levels, that the IAAF will "target" them as well. That should be our expectation.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,117
    Quote Originally Posted by mungo man View Post
    I laughed because I can't tell if you are trolling or trying to create a twitter meme or are actually serious.

    Either way, I can't debate based on emotions. I focus on science. Even when it comes to deciding who should use which facility, I would defer to the Science
    Back at you genius... welcome to the 21st century.
    So sorry things are so complex for you ������
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,476
    There is surely no escaping the fact that the sport is going to look rather ridiculous when its definition of who is eligible to compete as a woman differs between events.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,476
    Quote Originally Posted by mungo man View Post
    Why is it a horrible analogy?
    It's a poor analogy because everybody has a period of time when they are eligible for the World Under 20s.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •