Caster Semenya gets a make over
A few weeks ago, I wrote about
Caster Semenya, the South African track star who has been subjected to invasive gender tests because she doesn't fit our stereotypical notions of femininity.
I wrote, "What's really at stake here is not whether Semenya is female, but whether she is female ENOUGH to pass our culturally rigid definitions of femaleness. And instead of honoring a remarkable young woman's achievements, the argument hinges on the notion that she's too GOOD to possibly be a woman."
Just a few days ago, Semenya was photographed for the cover of
South Africa's You Magazine, wearing what can be described as femme drag - nail polish, hair styled, make up, jewelry and in a designer black dress.
She told the BBC:
"Now that I know I can look like this I'd like to dress like this more often."
There's nothing wrong of course with Semenya wanting to dress or look
feminine, but this is clearly a response to the insipid criticism and
interrogation of those who insisted she was a man, rather than a
personal fashion choice. And you know what, this pisses me off. Let her
wear her hair in cornrows. Give her back her goddamn track suits. She's
a
runner - not a contestant on
Project Runway.
The people who really need a make over are the f*cktards who insist there's only one way to be female.
Your thoughts? Sound off in the comments, but know that I will delete bigoted comments and personal attacks.
26 Comments
julieruin said:
poor girl - i read that they didn't even tell her she was undertaking gender testing. they said it was a drug test. i hope this is over for her soon.
Rosa323 said:
I agree completely. This seems so manufactured. Shame on whoever came up with the idea to do this "makeover." She's an effing athlete. She should not have to play dress-up.
cdyexhibit said:
Sorry, but if you're going to report on this, you should report the facts: Semenya did not undergo gender verification because "she doesn't fit our stereotypical notions of femininity." Rather, she is suspected of having a medical condition that would give her an unfair advantage against her competitors. People that make this an issue of gender identity — as opposed to science — are woefully mistaken as to why these tests are being carried out.
Anna Pulley said:
What Semenya has been subjected to is completely an issue of gender baiting. From The Root, "Semenya is hardly the first woman—notably, never a man—forced to undergo sex testing to compete in amateur sports. From 1967 to 1999, all female Olympiads were forced to take versions of the test. The phantom menace of men gaming the system to compete as women never materialized, but athletes were nonetheless routinely deemed to have insufficiently pure femininity. Eight women were barred from the 1996 Olympics, the last at which the tests were used, the Los Angeles Times reports."
cdyexhibit said:
You seem to be oblivious as to why the physiological specifics of one's gender might predispose them to having an unfair physical advantage over their competitors in an athletic competition. THAT is the impetus that incited this — at times impertinent and obtrusive — consideration of her real gender composition. She is NOT an actress, nor should she be fodder for the tabloids: she's an athlete, if she has an unfair advantage it needs to be addressed. According to your rationale, exposing cheating professional-baseball players to ridicule is not comeuppance for misdeeds but steroid-bating.
tammydownunder said:
Sadly, it has been disclosed that Ms. Semenya is a hermaphrodite. Medical reports indicate she has no ovaries, but rather has internal male testes, which are producing large amounts of testosterone.
The presence of both male and female characteristics will come as a devastating blow to Semenya, who has fought off snide remarks about her masculine appearance for much of her life.
"This is a medical issue and not a doping issue where she was deliberately cheating," an IAAF spokesman, Nick Davies, told the Herald.
"These tests do not suggest any suspicion of deliberate misconduct but seek to assess the possibility of a potential medical condition which would give Semenya an unfair advantage over her competitors. There is no automatic disqualification of results in a case like this."
Earlier the IAAF said it was likely that Semenya would keep her medal because the case was not related to a drug matter.
Anna Pulley said:
where did you read this?
Jason said:
There is an article on the Huffington Post regarding the test.
Wendy C said:
So, is she socially acceptable now? Why wasn't she before?
Wendy C said:
Ms Pulley,
Check out:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2009/09/10/2009-09-10_caster_semenya_.html
tammydownunder said:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/secret-of-semenyas-sex-stripped-bare/2009/09/11/1252519599453.html
Megan Cottrell said:
Anna, I've tried for awhile to think of something really constructive to add. But I don't have anything. I just really liked this post and the points you made. Thanks for crusading for all women who choose to be something other than what society tells us we have to be.
Joe the Cop said:
Sorry Anna, I think that last comment from vnon was meant for Arresting Tales
OSD said:
Anna, you are not an athlete. You are commenting on a subject you haven't a slightest clue of. Female athletes have a certain amount of testosterone naturally present. Semenya has A LOT more. That means Semenya has a HUGE advantage over female athletes. Beating a world record in the 800 by 10 seconds is unheard of. Semenya is more male than female. Semenya should be stripped of any medals and awards and should compete with males.
Or, all female events should be removed, and all humans should race in the same competitions.
One or the other. You are either completely female, or you are not.
chicagocliche said:
I know this post is old, but I just wanted to say that both medically and socially there are clearly more than just two sexes/genders. Sports and society at large have failed to identify this even in the face of intersexed individuals. I do not think Semenya should be punished for our society's lack of acknowledgment that there is an entire spectrum of people beyond male and female. There is no 100% woman. In fact, she has a vagina and passed tests to get into the Olympics. Not long ago we wouldn't have had any other testing beyond looking at her vagina and going, yep that's a vagina and therefore she's a woman. I don't mean to attack you, but we live in a society that denies its diversity and medicalizes anything/anyone who is deemed "abnormal" by standards made up bypeople who benefited from suggesting that there are only two sexes/genders and that males are superior. I know plenty of men who would be out run by many women I know, does that mean those men are women and those women men?
Dienne said:
I don't think I've ever agreed with OSD before, but, sadly, I do this time. The issue isn't her gender, it's her sex. Biologically, she's more male than female, which is an unfair athletic advantage for her over other women. If a female athlete were taking male hormones, I don't think anyone would have a problem saying that's unfair. So how is it any more fair that she naturally produces male hormones because she has internal male sex organs?
I feel really bad for her personally. This has to be horribly confusing for her and to play out in such a public way is unfathomable. But that doesn't change reality.
There was no intentional cheating and I think she should keep any medals she's won so far, but she shouldn't be allowed to compete in female athletics in the future.
Rosa323 said:
OSD, Dienne and others: Sex is not an either/or proposition, even biologically/scientifically. You may say that Semenya has more testosterone than the average woman, so she has an unfair advantage, and should compete as a man. Okay, but what about women who have longer legs than others? Women who more easily build muscle? Women who are naturally thinner than most? Female athletes who compete at this level ALREADY have lots of physical characteristics that give them an advantage over, say, me, and those who don't have those characteristics (like myself) are weeded out early on. It's not a level playing field to begin with, so to say that a bit extra testosterone gives Semenya an advantage that is soooo unfair that she should be disqualified is a bit hypocritical, don't you think? Or do you want to kick the women who have legs longer than average? Great! Competing against the "average" women in the world, I could probably win a few races!
For the record, I think that maybe the women's running/ mens running categories are a bit outdated, given what we know now about sex. Maybe it should be a height class, like wrestlers have weight classes? I'm not sure. I don't have the answer. But Semenya is a woman, because she identifies as a woman. Whether or not she has ALL the female sex organs is frankly none of our business. So as long as there are male/female categories in running, she should compete as female.
Dienne said:
So what about a male-to-female transgender person? Should she be allowed to compete as a woman simply because she identifies that way? Would it matter whether she's had the complete sex change operation or whether she's taking female hormones? What about a transvestite (man who simply wears women's clothes, but does not identify as female)? Where do you draw the line? How do you determine whether someone actually identifies as male or female?
I think biology is clear enough, at least for athletic competition. She has male sex organs (testes) and no female organs (ovaries, uterus, mammary glands). I'm guessing that genetically she is XY. She has male-level hormones.
The fact is that men are, biologically, far superior to women. Given normal human variation, the even most athletic women are non-competitive against men. I can't remember the exact statistic Eric Zorn gave, but it's something like the women's world record in the 50 meter wouldn't even place in the Illinois state boys' competition. Even if you had a "height class", women would not be competitive against men with the same height. So if you have someone who is, by nearly all physical parameters, male, there is simply no way that other women can compete against her.
Heidi said:
OSD said: "Anna, you are not an athlete. You are commenting on a subject you haven't a slightest clue of."
OSD, you do not know the rules of grammar. Please refrain from ending a sentence with a preposition. And since you don't know how to use English correctly, maybe you should stop typing altogether.
Dienne said:
Sorry, should have said that men are "athletically" superior to women. Not "biologically". My bad. Slaps hand.
OSD said:
Fine, Heidi, I could have worded it better.
Do you have anything intelligent to add on the point itself? I noticed you didn't add any comments or refute the fact that Anna is not an athlete, and is clearly commenting from a postion of ignorance. And apparently, you are too since you had nothing worthwhile to say other than nitpicking on grammar.
Rosa, you obviously aren't an athlete either.
Normal characteristics such as being taller, or longer legs gives you advantages in some sports, but not in the 800. It should be completely obvious that there is a limit to how being tall helps you in the 800. You don't see 6'6" women in the 800 do you? So more height doesn't automatically mean an advantage in the 800. Semenya has higher levels of testosterone than most women. A lot more. She's running on jet fuel, everybody else is on unleaded. If she was on HGH, she would be banned. Testosterone, to a woman, is essentialy HGH.
There are men's and women's sports for a reason. There should be a definition of a woman, based on provable scientific standards, perhaps levels of XY chromosomes or levels of testosterone. I'm not a doctor, but those are two ideas off the top of my head. Women should be allowed to play in men's sports if they can handle it. But it should be completely obvious why men should not be allowed in women's sports. Simply because the men would pinch out 90% of the women, and that would be the end of women's sports.
Rosa323 said:
I don't think that the "point" that Anna is not an athlete has anything to do with the discussion. No, I'm not a world-class runner either. I was offering height as a standard just as a suggestion, and I did not profess that to be the be-all and the end-all solution. That doesn't work? Fine. Let's urge those who have control over these things to find a better solution.
Secondly, if we should not comment on a story like this because we're not athletes, how should we react to you proposing scientific standards like XY chromosomes or levels of testosterone (where would the cutoff be? How male is too male?) when you're clearly not a doctor? The thing is, this issue is not black and white. And it's frustrating to see all the "kick her out" solutions that assume that sex is binary and anyone who is not 100% female is male. Because male is the default, right?
Okay, Dienne, I looked up those stats and you're right. The record for the 100 meter (I found that more quickly than I could the 50) is Flo-Jo's 10.49 seconds, and the high school record (made by a boy) is 10.02 seconds. It sounds so embarrassing, right? Flo-Jo can't even beat HIGH SCHOOL boys! But then you realize that most world record-holders set their records when they were younger than 25, and I'm willing to bet that most of them were almost at their peak when they were, yes, in high school. So if there's a one-second difference between the male and the female record, and in between is the male high school record, that's not that surprising.
As for male to female transpeople, I don't know. But the topic at hand is not a transperson. Semenya is a woman who may or may not have some intersex characteristics. That doesn't make her less of a woman, and yes, HER gender identity matters. It is dehumanizing to tell a female-identified person that she is not female ENOUGH.
voluptuouspanic said:
I don't understand what Anna not being a *professional* athlete has to do with anything, either. You have no idea what her athletic background is. Unless you don't think dance is athletic (which is nonsense), I'm a former athlete, and I completely agree with everything Rosa323 says.
picodulce said:
First: No reason to add "you're not an athlete"; it's rude and has very little to do with the point. You wouldn't ask Brian Urlacher about how much testosterone he should have - you ask a doctor.
About the matter at hand - "mannish" women have been questioned about their gender, from the East German swimmers to Martina Navratilova. And if there isn't evidence of actual intentional doping, I don't see why you'd take away a medal, especially if the governing body is not then testing ALL the women who compete and deciding on a certain level of testosterone that's allowed in track and field contests.
Because sex is NOT binary, and it's foolish to say "she has a lot of testosterone, boot her!" Even with the testosterone (and don't believe for a second that some of her competitors aren't filled with unnatural testosterone - track and field is where ingenious chemists ply their wares), what she did was incredible.
I believe that she'll have her medal taken away; we're not at the point where people will accept that there is no rule about how much testosterone a person can have, just "male" and "female" categories.
And I was an athlete, follow male and female athletics voraciously, and know a bit about training.
Wendy C said:
As for Semenya's possible medical results, this is an article that I first posted on Eric Zorn's website explaining the different test results and how they might explain her ability to compete as a woman.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-sci-runner-side21-2009aug21,0,5766157.story
plemochoe said:
I guess I'm late to the party...but in case anyone is still looking here...the above comments to the effect that Semenya has a big advantage because of her internal testes is almost certainly wrong. The most authoritative account is here: http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/08/caster-semenya-male-or-female.html
She appears to have been affected by the testosterone to some extent, because her voice is deep and she has some facial hair (not much). But she can't have a penis (they do look at them naked). There's a high likelihood that she has Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome - her internal testes are producing testosterone, yes, but she isn't getting all the "benefit" of it, and she never has - because genetically, she was most likely "determined" chromosomally as a male. Two points from this: one, this is all lucky for her, despite the humiliation, because those internal testes are dangerous and need to be surgically removed. Two, sports rules are more sensitive than you think. After the removal of the testes, and perhaps a waiting period of a year or so, she should be able to compete as a woman because that is what she has determined herself to be. She does not have ovaries, but she does have a vagina!
And you could add, three, we're all a little smarter about things because of this. All the jokes about does she have a dick, yes or no, were, surprise surprise, off target. She doesn't have a penis; she is probably genetically male; but she is still a human woman and she can still compete as a woman without any unfair advantage.
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: