Intersex, IAAF and the incredulous
LAST WEEK, Caster Semenya, 800m Olympic champion, pledged to challenge the IAAF rule on testosterone levels in females at the Court of Arbitration. And so she should. Female runners with naturally high testosterone levels will have to race against men or take medication from November 1 to be able to race in track events from 400 metres up to a mile, according to the IAAF. These women must take medication for six months before they can compete and
then maintain a lower testosterone level. This is an incredulous attack by the IAAF on persons born as intersex, that is not the typical male or female classification.
The IAAF statement pointed to its latest research which showed there is a performance advantage for females with higher testosterone over certain track distances.
But is it not possible that other factors could give these
athletes an advantage such as training routine, quality of the coaching, ability to handle pressure, commitment to excellence on the track, family support and belief in God. There can be so many other variables.
In any case, suppose taking medication does not work, what next? Where is the scientific evidence that medication will work? Who has it been tried on? What are the side effects of this medication? No woman should be forced to take medications which might have side effects. Additionally, who will be responsible for the consequences of the side effects? Did not the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS), some years ago, express concerns over the lack of evidence proving the precise degree of competitive advantage that a hyperandrogenic athlete would possess?
In addition, isn’t this new rule doping in reverse? The World Anti-Doping Agency is against doping to enhance performance but now the IAAF is in support of doping to decrease performance. This is a double standard. There must be a consistent position of being against taking drugs to alter and affect performance, whether up or down. Will men with naturally low testosterone levels be able to take medication to raise their levels?
It is equally preposterous to ask a human being to surgically remove organ that produces testosterone. Every surgery has risks, and no one should be subjected to a surgery just to satisfy a rule of the IAAF.
These are not women who have adjusted their bodies. These are natural, normal human beings. Did not Jamaica have an outstanding female athlete who naturally produced high levels of testosterone? This draconian measure should be rejected, and what is the position of Jamaica?
On June 4, two transgender athletes, Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood, who competed against females in Connecticut, USA, were accused of unfair advantage. Indeed, those persons who have converted from males to females have an unfair advantage, and this should not be so. However, a hyperandrogenic athlete is not in that category and should not be treated as such.
The IAAF should reveal the details of scientific evidence and research. Why not 200m when both 400m and 200m are considered sprints? Why not 5,000 metres? Who decided what events should be subjected to this new rule?
This new ruling has farreaching implications for more women with naturally high testosterone levels. It would bar these women from competing also in football, netball and perhaps even cricket, or changes in the football rules.
Hopefully, the IAAF will change this unfair rule.