sorry, the first paragraph should end - she is NOW on suicide watch.

Graeme - At one time I thought that a Professional was a wealthy professional player of a sport - earning something like a million dollars for a prize fight, more for a season of hockey or baseball.  And an amature was just someone like me, playing for the love of the game, practicing on our own time, and not getting paid for it.

My son told me a different story.  An amature is someone who is wealthy enough to be able to afford the time, equipment, coaching, etc. to devote all his or her time to the sport, and not have to work for a living.  You said it, a rich boys club.  A professional works.  A sailor who works on a ship cannot qualify for a yauht race, because the sailer gets paid.  A rich boy who can play with his father's boat all day, every day - belonging to the best clubs, having the best of equipment is an amature. 

It kind of changed my entire view of the olympics. 

My reaction to the story about this South African racer was similar to yours.  I immediately thought of the poor girl.  Probably all her life she had wondered if there was something wrong with her - she was so tall and strong, and so different from her sisters and the other little girls she knew.  Her dresses just didn't look right on her.  Perhaps people sometimes mistook her for her brother.  She may not have had much interest in boys, except to compete in school yard games.  And boys probably never called her for a date to the prom.  But she discovered that she could run.  Oh, she could run.  So she concentrated on that one thing that she was better at than any other girl she knew.  She won an olympic metal.  She was so proud.  And then - then they took it from her.  And worse - they told her that she wasn't a woman at all.  Born and raised female - and told in this abrupt way that she wasn't a woman.  No wonder she is on suscide watch.  She is going to have to reinvent herself - not quietly, privately, or with the love and support of her family, a kindly doctor, and a few close friends - but before the accusing eyes of the whole world.

In the nineteenth century, the belief was that the experience of athletics (of the right sort i.e. cricket or track, but not baseball) developed "manly" qualities of leadership and character and morality. It was broadly called muscular Christianity. For the upper class, it was necessary to have these qualities because it would have the leading roles in society. But it was bad for women and for the common people because it would give them ideas above their station.

The athletic clubs of the time, then, were expensive, and only for the male, gentlemanly class - though women might be honoured with a ladies day or with some role that developed womanly qualities like grace.

As upper class clubs, they tolerated gambling (a definition of a gentleman was that he would pay his debts). But gambling led some clubs to slip in undesirably lower class males (like the boxer Jim Corbett), and pay them under the table.

The modern Olympics  originated in France with the idea of developing a more muscular Christian leadership for the army. It was not for the common people. The device to keep them out was the amateur rule. AVery Brundage of the US enforced it strictly through most of the twentieth century because he came from a wealthy family that saw itself as ordained and privileged to provide leadership over the common folk.

Though the rules have eased.. the Olympics remain dominated by the very, very rich who daily get richer from their control of his milch cow.

It goes so far more than we think. I do not know what the gender tests found, but I know you don't just find out you have non-descended testicals or too much of this hormone or this chromosome. I know the pain all too well of being "unclear" in regard to gender.

You find out you will never have a biological child. Do we understand that trauma and pain and announcing that rather casually or almost flippantly?

You find out that your college scholarship is gone. Most times in these cases it depends upon your competing in sports. Your hopes, dreams, career... perhaps gone or placed suddenly out of your reach. How would hearing that announcement casually feel?

You find out that the person you were/are is not who you are. The reflection in the mirror or who you feel like is not what your chemistry or anatomy is. You ask, "what am I"? Nobody has to say "freak" to make you feel like one.

You may have to re-examine your sexuality. Let's say you woke tomorrow and found out you being with a same-sex partner yesterday is straight today and an opposite sex partner yesterday is a same-sex partner today. Imagine if some things were "wrong" to your culture, religion or just personally you considered wrong. How do you deal with the guilt and shame of not knowing?

Imagine most everything you thought about yourself being an illusion.  

You think nobody will see beyond it? You wonder about who will be able to see beyond it. Who would want you? Will you ever meet anyone? How can you tell them?

I was 32 before anyone saw me undressed. I cannot explain the stress it takes on a relationship when one cannot trust, cannot be vulnerable, cannot be open... it is doomed and they were.  It was not anything anyone could see, but I felt my body was wrong. My wife was the first person I was myself with.

You have put this into a context that goes far beyond anything I had imagined. I have thought the Olympic action wrong. You have shown it to be beneath contempt.

Thank you for telling us.

I feel that those last bastions of "male only" or "female only" have to address those who have anatomy or physiology like this and other gender variances.

It is not always so simple to assign sex and next to impossible to assign gender. How do  folks plan to sit around and discuss what they officially decide someone is? 

I acknowledge there is a dilemma where athletics are concerned. There is an issue of advantage. Countries are out to win. It is why we have medal counts and why even the difference between gold, silver and bronze is fought over and matters.

They are not out for just enjoyment of sport or international coming together in the name of sport. It is also plain and simple competition and often not about how one plays the game as much as it is the win. It is why ages are lied about, people are doped with or without their knowledge... Wins mean continued funding. Losses mean losing sponsors. Wins start and restart careers. Losses can end them. It is a financial endeavour for some and love of sport for others.

It is a rich person's game if our only vantage point is the west. For someone almost destined to die of disease, hunger or in an armed conflict... someone who is beyond our understanding of poor, it is a way out. They will train you and feed you and clothe you and keep you healthy for some talent they spot in you.

On gender issues, you will not hear often about males who "are really females" having advantage over males. I struggled to think of a sport, anyone with any ideas? It is really about advantage, because Alyn Libman is permitted to compete. Alyn was an agressive female skater, who became a man and still skates. Alyn won the right to compete against other men.

We will only likely ever hear of females who "are really males" having an an advantage over other females.

Yes, women compete in separate events than men because we know there are differences in their physical bodies.

That said, are we look at denser bones and increased lung capacity or are we looking at sex and reproductive organs? It is not the lungs being checked or the bones.

Yes, the chromosomes/hormones and body chemistry are all relevant yet, if we are looking at muscle mass, I would hazard to say I have seen more muscle-laden women. If we are looking at skeleton or bone density, are tall women or those with great bones also out?

We are looking at what exactly? Are we looking at if a woman minus a womb is at some advantage? Are we determining whether undescended testicles are a  help or hindrance?What are we looking at and why?

Yes, the dilemma plays out that left to their competitive devices many simply will chemically dope, lie about ages and enlist those who may qualify as females who are gentically or anatomically different. I read about some coach thinking a whole team of "Amazon-almost women" would be killer. There is the issue of advantage. Look at Heidi Krueger to see how far some countries and coaches have been willing to go.

Yet, it comes up against the issue that we (those not so neatly boxed in gender) have talents, skills, gifts... Saying that one is not female enough and too male, leaves us where exactly? 

Often excluded completely and absolutely or left only competing in Gay Olympics, Tranny Olympics... how many of those can you name, how many are on cereal boxes or having their education paid for on scholarship?

Yes, the sports community and the IOC must work through issues of advantage.

Yet, why are we still learning?  Testing of gender began in 1966 and was seen as invasive and degrading, performed to weed out the pumped up with anabolic steroids athletes. Now, there is testing for steroid use. Now, there are also other ways... yet, in this day and age are chromosomes the only answer to sex or gender? Only XX are women according to rules, but we know other possibility exists. Again, chromosomes can be XX with ambigouos genitalia or the genitalia can appear correct and the chromosome not be XX.

Why are we still learning how we ruin lives AFTER having done this before? We have been here before and we have ruined careers, lives and opened people to shame and ridicule.... 800m in 2006 Santhi Soundarajan. Look at Edinanci Silva, Brazilian judo (1996-2004), who because of fore-knowledge of her being born with both organs, though having surgery and testing fully female by chromome was publicly referred to as "he" by competitors.

We learned how we ruin careers and lives in 1967 with Ewa Kłobukowska, who had a rare condition that gave her no advantage and yet she was banned.

In 2004, the IO said that transgender athletes could compete if meeting certain requirements, such as genital reconstructive surgery and at least two years of hormones. The IOC also requires that "legal recognition of their assigned sex has been conferred by the appropriate official authorities," such as by a national court. That is not an easy endeavour in some places. In some places you simply cannot legally change gender. So?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/06/14/MNGNM75MUK1.DTL

Yes, it needs ironed out. Yet, there was and is a human being involved.

I heard yesterday that South African doctors tested her and told her coaches, but not her, that she should not go to complete.  Her coaches and the competitive authority in South Africa decided to ignore the doctors advice and not only send her but keep the information from her.  Now she is under suicide watch.

I know that Mr. Chuene lied about previous testing or South African official's concerns. For that, he will be held accountable. I personally, withhold judgment on his motives and his character.

I believe that one has the right to medical confidentiality up to and until it becomes the business of the athletics commision. It is only supposed to be made public IF you are disqualified. There is nothing to say she should have been or, in fact, will be.

Nothing was proven and we must remember that gender verification was dropped from Olympic sports in 1999 because it is complicated and a delicate issue.

The IAAF itself first abandoned gender testing.in 1991, saying there was too many uncertainties.  The IOC followed their suit. The IAFF revised policy and still do gender verification but under certain conditions and within certain parameters and with certain expectations and rulings. It is not compulsory and is done because of findings in anti-doping tests or because of challenge being lodged by competitors. You can read their policy (2006) http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/imported/36983.pdf

Can we say withdrawing her would have been the right decision? With hindsight we certainly can attempt to.

She was tested Aug 7 and the results were not back in time for the race. My question is what do you do? Do you tell her what the tests were for, when if they turn out fine it may effect her training and performance?

Do you tell her, "you cannot compete"? If so, on what grounds?

What do you tell her that may or may not be true? What if her tests had come back that she should be allowed to compete? Would he have left himself, the agency and his country open to a lawsuit?

What exact testing was done on Aug 7? I cannot say I have heard expressly what that testing was. The average member of the public does not know what those tests are supposed to entail and what the IAFF permits in gender variance.

The IAFF itself does not think the determination should be solely a lab determination.  Results or no results, was the SA tests more than a lab test? Did SA do what the IAFF considers necessary to determine gender? Was the medical evaluation by a panel? Were the required doctors present? The IAFF believes it should be gynocologist, endocrinologist, psychologist, internalist, along with an expert on gender/ transgenderism.

There are certain things that are allowed withint IAFF policy and gender variance. Would you have been able to diagnose which it was without the test results? Certain conditions have been determined by the IAFF to not provide advantage and stand in the way of competition, yet they are gender variance.

IE. Androgen insensitivity is ok.  In this case, Turner's syndrome would have allowed her to compete and so would have gonadal dysegenesis along with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, polycystic ovary syndrome...

BTW many of these have as symptoms masculinization... from ambiguous genitals, lack of breasts, hirsutism, failed or delayed puberty, no menstrual periods, even male pattern baldness...

How would one know without test results? How do we know now?

In other words, it could have been and still may be something that would not have barred her from competition. Her career may be over due to media coverage and NOT her condition.

Would South Africa have been in trouble had they held her back without that panel and with no results in if that panel was in place?

What has been done opening her to this scrutiny when she may still be within the parameters of allowed to compete female athlete as determined by the IAFF?

 It is very easy when we have the priviledge of hindsight, not so easy without it.

I stand by Mr. Chuene and anyone else who believed in being delicate, diligent, deliberate and distinguished in regards to this matter. That does not mean I endorse or apporove of his lying. I can however suspend judgement on his motives and character.

I feel for this young girl for the public humiliation she has ungone.  To have it announced world wide that you are a hermaphrodite and you didn't know is horrendously hurtful.

And yet as long as we have women competing against women and men against men, you can't allow a woman to compete who has the advantage of excessive testosterone due to testicals that no one knew were there.

I suppose that for her, most of her life, she was more or less like other little girls.  The huge gain in size and muscle strength would only have developed as she went through puberty and those gonads kicked into high gear.  Just like the small boy who grows 6 inches and 30 pounds in one school year.

It is certainly particularily sad to realise that there were some questions ahead of time but she competed anyway.  They were either naive or cruel to think that no one would challenge such a dramatic run in any athlete. 

I look forward to a day when we fully accept people who are neither completely male nor completely female.  At present, our culture considers such people as freaks.  We convince them that they can be "fixed" by surgery and drugs, and "assigned" to their "correct" position in the dualistic system we now think is reality.

Lastpointe,

If you read the IAFF policy, hormone levels (even caused by gonadal dysengenesis) would not alone bar someone from competeing. The IAFF in their policy, I provided the link, sees that a number of gender variant conditions do not lead to unfair advantage.

The issue we are confronting and the journey we are taking a young person unfairly on along with us, is journeying on our perception of gender and our perception of what leads to unfair advantage in sporting competitions.

The media gives us a taste and to savour what it means we have to pick up our own silverware and chew and digest. Often, we don't.

Hermaphrodites, which the preferred term is usually unisex, are permitted to compete if they are within the medical parameters laid out by the IAFF. Ambiguous genitalia alone are not enough to bar people from competition. Neither are hormonal tests alone... Transexuals are also allowed to compete.

The argument from officials, back in my day a few decades ago, was that my hormone levels made me stronger physically than "girls" and that I would be faster because "boys" are. What they did not take into account is that my hormone levels also made me not lean, but muscular and stocky. It meant that I carted much more weight up and down a basketball court and that I was not flexible and able to jump as high.

My early growth spurt meant that I had to adjust to a new centre of gravity and was ackward within my own body. Then, my growth simply stopped. Other "girls" continued to grow. I was the shortest on my team, but I had been trained so long, expecting I would be tall, that I had some degree of skills. I was great at ball handling and from a freethrow line I did not miss much. I became the point guard.

When my basketball scholarship ended, because it came out a rape in an on-campus rape investigation that I was gay at a religious school and "different down there". I could have played at another school, I was being recruited but "different down there" came up from a coach. 

It meant testing and being I told I could not longer play college basketball. They did not take into account that I never trained with "boys" and was conditioned and exercised as a "girl".

There would not be a fan or a coach watching a video tape of me on a basketball court who would see an unfair advantage. In fact, whatever I got I had to work harder for.

Look at all the variation allowed by the IAFF and the IOC that does not contribute to unfair advantage.
 

Hi Stevie,

I agree that this is a very grey scenario and that rules change and adjust over the years.

Issues of transgendered athletes i imagine will evolve.   unfortunately fraudulent athletes also occur and hence the ongoing issue of testing.

Although we will never know, I would guess that when This current runner popped onto the scene last year and suddenly with minimal training was beating everyone, that coaches and trainers and officials were concerned and questions were raised.

It is a terrible thing that more due diligence as to the rules, guidelines, ...... were not done then or if they were done that wiser heads didn't figure out the next step before they thrust this young woman on the international stage.

There is no way that someone wins in such a commanding way that it doesn't raise alarms about doping or something. 

I guess I wonder if she hasn't been made a sacrificail lamb before the agenda of someone to hasten the rule changes.

Those changes won't be easy to figure out. 

Add in teh fact that the Olympic committee and olympic movements are so highly politicaized and it is hard to see how this will unfold..

Should this younggirl compete with others women?  I dont' know.  Does she appear to have developed an advantage since puberty.  No question.  however I would say that many althetes have advantages of some sort or another.  Economical, environmental, genetic, social, cultural......The issue I guess is whether it is an unfair advantage.

All athletes have advantages  and disadvantages of some sort or another. When you take into account economical, environmental, genetic, social, cultural differences how can any competition be fair??

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.

Thus, all sport should be played and watched as a game, and not taken so seriously, which the Creator God  just might have intended.

good point. the fastest is the fastest. It's not the fastest female or the fastest black or the fastest midget.

Is there any talk of banning Usain Bolt because his legs give him an advantage?

I say let her race!

The sad reality is that in this race we confront it all... all our isms rolled up in one event.

Our double standards, our sexism, our racism, our Euro-centricism, our homophobia, our classism, our ignorance on gender....

There are some sports open to those who can't afford gym memberships and fancy training equipment... running is one of those sports. You can hear many a nasty thing said when those who paid all that money for equipment, coaches, training and they lose to someone who cannot afford shoes. This race is not the only one you will hear comments like that at. We prefer not to admit they are made.

 We prefer not to admit many things.

Caster Semenya peed in a cup before a race, observed by officials close enough that she could not use a bag of urine. I know how close they watch in random drug tests at work in the US. I can bet they were as thorough. So, they did not see her pulling out a penis. That said, let's say she has internal testes and no uterus and no ovaries. What makes one male and what makes one female? Is a woman one with a uterus and ovaraies and breasts and a man one with penis and testes?

Let's not talk about racing... let's just think... do you lose your gender if your parts are missing? Are you what you are? Are you really? Would you suddenly be something else if I drew your blood and announced you were?

Caster would be told she HAS to take hormones and/or consent to surgery to be considered a woman. She would also have to have surgery and take hormones to be considered a man... By racing officals and by society. Science acknowledges more than a binary system but we usually insist, "male or female?"

Now, if you pass a drop your pants test, what gets you chemically and psychologically tested? Someone complaining and they can complain just to name and shame you.

They were complaining before Caster even raced, even in the Jrs. earlier. Why? Well, because coaches, racers, the world... expects women to look certain ways and if they don't... well, if they don't, they get labelled the L word or have their gender questioned.

That is just the way it is. If you don't fit the gender role, you must be lesbian/gay or really a man/woman.

Yep, it can happen to men, athletes being accused of being gay. Oh, but we think manly men would beat the crap out of pansy men or they should have so nobody tests men. Nobody wants to say they got beat by girly-boy, even if it is a sport where girly-boy could have an advantage. Our stupid gender stuff again.

The worry is testosterone levels. Yes, there is abuse of male hormones in order to pump up performance. And that's a bigger problem among men than among women, since women athletes largely don't want to risk the side effects of facial hair and baldness... Yet, men only get a blood tests. Nobody subjects men to chromosome tests or physical exams or psychological testing. How big or small your tool is, if you have ovaries tucked someplace.... that stuff is considered nobody's business.

They also know that it is not always about pumping up performance or unfair advantage... as in AIS (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) the extra testosterone is not used by the body.

Still, a higher than average testosterone level for a female will get you gender tested. But a lower than average male test? ...  and you thinking it has never occurred in a test? Surely it has, if they tested. They don't . Would they talk about reclassifying him as a woman? No, we never heard of it, not once. I can list more than a few women. If they had talked about making a man race with women or take hormones or go get his wally cut off, what would society say then? Bet me nobody would dare say for him to cut his manhood off. They won't cause they don't test for it.

Ask top female athletes about routinely being accused of being gay or really men. It is not an occasional thing. Ask Amelie Mauresmo. Ask many a woman golfer, tennis player, track and field star...

We want to be so far in our journey, but we aren't. Taking part in sports can get you a lesbian label. Being a lesbian is still seen as being a deviant, can't have them on the circuit or in the showers... still a stigma... still will have sponsor shy away....

Our gender definition of female is so narrow. It means we devalue and stigmatize women athletes based on our gender norms.

It means women have long hair flowing in races, well duh it ain't hard to figure out that will slow your time. You have long painted fingernails in the block, well again, duh it ain't going to help you start faster. So, why do they do it? They either bring who they are in everyday or they don't. Some will bring some other presentation than their everyday so that they don't get labelled butch or called a man. Who wants the name and shame?

Why on earth would you run in bikini bottoms when most women hate being seen in a bikini? Why would facial hair indicate manhood? No wonder CNN said 20 million US women remove facial hair weekly.  Oh, but that is done quietly... are those women men?

What do we do about those who both pass and fail gender tests? Are they women one day and men the next?

Maria Jose Martinez Patino (Spanish hurdler)  passed a Barr Body test in 1983, buccal smear, and was certified female. She forget her certificate in 1985 and was restested and failed the Barr. They did a karotype. She is a woman with AIS, Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. The extra testosterone in her body, her body could not use. No unfair advantage.

India's Soundarajan both passed and failed tests.

It is not just about failed tests, we decide stuff even if the tests say female. Ask most people about Fatima Whitbread.

So, we want to scream "what are they?". You have to be something and so we want to say "she's a man" or "just look at her" or say "those people should not race" the same as racers voiced after the race Caster won.

We ain't there yet, though we like to pretend we are.

We are not there with regards to women. We expect no ripped muscles, no facial hair, make-up, look femme.... we expect it so much there are female boxers with high heels, get real folks! The more "masculine" the sport, the more "feminine" they need to appear.

We are not there with the intersexed, who make up 1 in 2000 births in the US. Doctors used to just reverse whatever they deemed "wrong". We still think that something is "wrong" and we still expect people to pick one and "reverse" whatever is the other.

I say test everybody or nobody.

When I first saw this story, I felt a profound but ill defined revulsion. The responses above have been enormously informative, revealing a far greater problem than I had realized. I do thank all of you.

Just casually listening to Dr. Oz today as it was playing in the background where I was. He was discussing facial hair and mentioned polycystic ovaries and its resultant hair growth. He mentioned about how elevated testosterone would be. Yep, another condition that elevates testosterone in the well... female.... maybe I guess until some expert says ya ain't....