Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 13 of 67 FirstFirst ... 311121314152363 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 663
  1. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella2 View Post
    Your frustrations and prejudices are showing once again son. And I mean, really, what on earth has Rudolph got to do with this discussion? How bizarre you'd try that one!

    As you - and some of the others that think this is only a scientific debate - should really know, individuals concerned with social commentary and sociological issues are going to have opinions here. This is because this IS beyond just 'biological' because it is not about medicine, but it is also sociological, because it is about creating new eligibility rules for females. They are attempting to define, within their own sport, what 'female' is, and it is not a definition that is agreed within the expert medical community. So sociologists, anthropologists, social commentators, politicians and other scientists - and sports people (they're non biologists too!) - are going to debate this, because their disciplines are concerned with the development of scientific knowledge, of health, of law, of gender...all things this new ruling impacts.

    So you're just going to have to accept that intelligent, learned people are going to argue that this is 'racist, sexist, this-ist, that'ist, yad yada, yippidy day' because they see the bigger picture and are not narrow minded.
    That is quite the monologue. You go around belittling people by calling them 'son' (more than one on this thread) and, so it seems, you actually expect them to give a shit what you say.

    I remembered one very thoughtful commentator named Joanna Harper, a trans scientist and athlete, who is one writer from the LGBTQ community who didn't feel compelled to respond to this issue in a way that condemned the IAAF as racist, sexist, misogynist, capitalist, etc. I apologize to her and the LGBTQ community for forgetting her contributions to the discussion.

    I have read many of your comments over the years and your intense dislike of certain coaches and their athletes because you believed they were dirty. It was like you were on a mission to ruin their reputations. That's why all your holier-than-thou commentary on this issue rings so hollow. Truth is, it's a tad amusing to listen to your pharisaic rants because they remind me of the religious right. I don't care what you say, you don't walk your talk.
    Last edited by trackCanuck; 05-03-2019 at 02:26 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by user4 View Post
    We have removed athletes from competition with females for almost 100 years because they were not normal females.

    So part of the problem is that it really is about politicians, and social engineers and commentators.
    Great points.

    I wonder what is driving so many of these social engineers and commentators. Boredom?
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, CO
    Posts
    7,567
    In the Doha thread, there was mention of a hope for "solidarity with her (Semenya) from the other women." That seems to me pie-in-the-sky thinking. So I emailed a female friend who was a world class distance runner. I asked her thoughts, and asked if she has spoken with some of her peers about it, and specifically asked how much solidarity Semenya's competitors might reasonably feel with Semenya. Her reply:

    "As for the DSD ruling AMEN! Semenya is a MAN, as are Niyansaba and Wambui. Is it sad that they have a birth defect? Yes, but does this mean all XX women are penalized? NO! I too feel that ALL events need to be included not just 400-1500. I think that once the XY runners start to run the 5k and up distances the IAAF will reassess these events as well. For now, I am choosing to tune out the bleeding heart liberals and focus on all the XX women who do work very hard and deserve to compete against women with normal ranges of testosterone. Rather than show “solidarity” to XY women what about showing compassion and solidarity to the three XX women runners who were denied an Olympic medal in Rio because three runners with undescended testes and levels of testosterone far exceeding normal ranges were allowed to run? Most if not all men and women elite runners I have talked feel that XY runners should have their own category or suppress levels to normal women’s levels."

    Obviously just speculation on her part about Wambui, (unless I've missed something), but there's the opinion of someone who might have/would have/could have been directly affected by this issue.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,357
    Oh trackCanuck, demonstrating your prejudices by continuing to unnecessarily pinpoint LGBT commentators; once again bringing up totally unrelated topics to the thread because of your frustrations (are you trolling son?); not understanding - or refusing to - the bigger implications around medical ethics and continuing to show your short-sightedness.

    As you cannot see this goes beyond 'science; is a medical ethics issue with sociological impact, and accept that many different people will rightfully want to debate this and have an opinion, then I'm done debating with you.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Pego View Post
    Those of us promoting biology do not want to make any rules how these individuals want to live their lives. We do not want to define what is female. We want to exclude individuals that may look like Jane, but have genetic composition/internal anatomy/physiology of Tarzan from the women's athletic competition. Nothing else.
    Medical ethics. Go read up. And maybe read the WMA response too.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    beyond help
    Posts
    12,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella2 View Post
    Medical ethics. Go read up. And maybe read the WMA response too.
    It so happens that I have been sitting on a bioethics committee of a couple of hospitals for over three decades and being lectured morality by you is beyond tolerable. Welcome on my list of personae non grata.
    "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
    by Thomas Henry Huxley
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ???? ???? in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.
    Posts
    11,137
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    As letsrun pointed out in a blog today (or yesterday), Semenya is XY chromosome, almost certainly due to the revelations in the CAS ruling. That was always suspected. So she would have been banned under the old Barr body test, as well.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,016
    Quote Originally Posted by DrJay View Post
    I don't care if Castor Semenya wears a dress or men's work pants. I don't care if she marries a man or a woman. I don't care which bathroom she uses. I don't care if she and her spouse have or adopt a child. I DO want that XX women with typical female-range testosterone levels don't have to compete against XY persons with male-range testosterone levels.
    All of this ^^^

    The people trying to make this into an LGBT-rights issue are missing the basic point of why sports were segregated into separate sex categories in the first place. They are trying to apply principles which are totally right in other, non-sex-segregated spheres of human activity, but just don't work here.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    beyond help
    Posts
    12,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Powell View Post
    All of this ^^^

    The people trying to make this into an LGBT-rights issue are missing the basic point of why sports were segregated into separate sex categories in the first place. They are trying to apply principles which are totally right in other, non-sex-segregated spheres of human activity, but just don't work here.
    Even irrational position in a debate is tolerable as long as the debate is civilized. When they start calling you names, questioning your ethics/morality is the time when I leave the room.
    "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
    by Thomas Henry Huxley
    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
  •