How do you define whether an athlete is male or female?
A simple task, you say? Well....maybe not according to the world of sports. Sports leagues, committees, and federations seem to be increasingly having problems defining what used to be thought of as common sense.
Last summer, 19-year old sprinter Dutee Chand’s ability to compete in the Rio Olympics was in limbo. Her fate was not tied up in her race time, but rather a controversial rule for Olympians that said female athletes could be disqualified if their natural testosterone levels were too high. Chand’s were.
The rationale behind the rule was that women with high testosterone fall outside the limits of “normal” female biology, giving them an unfair advantage. If they wanted to compete as women, the rule stated, they would need to take hormones or undergo invasive surgeries. Otherwise, they could compete against the men.
Chand decided to fight the rule, which had been adopted by both the governing body of track and field — the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) — and the International Olympics Committee (IOC). In July of last year, she won: the Court of Arbitration for Sport suspended the so-called “T-test.” It gave the IAAF two years to come back with scientific evidence that female athletes with naturally high testosterone actually had a significant advantage over their peers.
“Although athletics events are divided into discrete male and female categories, sex in humans is not simply binary,” the Court decided. “Nevertheless,” it added, “it is necessary for the IAAF to formulate a basis for the division of athletes into the male and female categories.” In other words, some kind of biological gender test is needed.
This week, the IAAF announced that it intended to fight the Court’s suspension of the T-test. “The IAAF stands by its Regulations and is continuing to collect the evidence,” a representative told BuzzFeed News by email. The IOC, meanwhile, said that it would not introduce any new hormone rules “until the issues of the case of Dutee Chand are resolved.”
On Friday, Chand will be competing in the 100-meter dash in Rio, making her the first Indian woman to qualify in the Olympic event in 36 years. As part of the rule’s temporary suspension, other women with high testosterone will also be allowed to compete. (The rules are different for trans athletes. Although trans men can compete without restriction, trans women will have to demonstrate lowered hormone levels for at least a year before competing.)
Historians and bioethicists have argued that Chand’s victory is only temporary. Even if the T-test is not used next year, the Court is still pushing for a gender test. Critics say these tests try to draw a firm line between the two sexes where none exists in nature — at the expense of women athletes deemed too masculine.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/azeenghorayshi/sex-testing-olympians?utm_term=.ss9PAKJ7K#.yv6VY59z5
Today, the question is how do you define whether an athlete is male or female? What criteria makes the determination? Most times you would say it's common sense. Michael Phelps is a male and Simone Biles is a female. No one is going to argue that. But how do you make that determination in legal language? And what do you do about athletes who might not be that clear-cut?
In the past it was strictly genitalia. If you have a penis, you compete as a male. If not, you are a female. Simple. But now, others have introduced other criteria such as genetic tests and hormone tests. If a woman (a biologically-born woman) has a higher testosterone level than other women, does that give her an unfair advantage? Some say it does and that the "masculine woman" should compete with the men. Many feminists say this is wrong because it's forcing all female athletes into a stereotype of perceived femininity. In other words, if a woman happens to be masculine, she gets punished.
And what role does gender identity play in this question? That's an even bigger debate.
= new reply since forum marked as read
