Summer RIO 2016 - Athletics (Track & Road events) 12th to 20th Aug

[wadistance]

god i love centro. showed exactly how to run a smart race. if its slow, go to the front. if its fast, stay back and slingshot around the final bend. I had $10 on him for the win as a bonus bet @$26 with william hill - had to reinvest my winnings to cash out, so it was lucky semenya was up next. She was never going to lose.

Gregson ran well, would have liked to have seen him hold his spot behind centro, but really, unless you can run a 48 second last lap, you're cactus. Willis obviously can, Centro can, Mak can. Gregson is probably worth 49ish, so being up there with 200m to go would have served him well. But at least he didnt absolutely **** it like Kiprop did.

Centro actually did an impressive workout during a comp about 6 weeks ago, ran an 800m in 1.48, 15mins later ran 800m as part of a 1500m in 1.48 then pulled out. Always knew he was in shape then, and was always going to medal.

Really ****ing gutted that Mo won. Don't like him, dont trust him.

 

[Rob]

You are coming at the discussion from the wrong angle. It is not a question of whether she should be classed as female or male. It is a question of whether the gender she identifies as, and is accepted as by the country of which she is a citizen, should be rejected for sporting reasons.

I agree completely with your last sentence, and disagree completely with your second. TBH, your position appears to be entirely contradictory.

The question is whether the gender she identifies as, and is accepted as by the country of which she is a citizen, should be classed as male or female for sporting reasons.

The argument that is cited in favour of rejecting her status as female is that she has an innate physiological advantage by virtue of her genetic circumstances. This ignores the fact that many athletes have similar or greater advantages that have nothing to do with being TS/intersex. If you remove the physiological argument, the only argument remaining is an ideological one.

It ignores it because it's irrelevant. There is nothing in the rules of sport at the Olympic level that prevent one competitor competing for having too much ability.

There are, however, rules about females participating in female sport actually being female. So it does indeed come down to physiology - in it's entirety. The point of the rule is physiology, and the answer should also be based in physiology. Otherwise we may as well abolish female-only sport and just have everyone compete together.

That's not to say I think Semenya should not be able to compete in the women's race. TBH, I don't really know the answer. But I know it's sure as shit not ideological.

I have no problem with people debating the issue, just let's be honest about the latent bigotry that is driving the opposition.

No, you're just labelling people you don't agree with as a bigot.

 

[Demosthenes]

It is disingenuous to claim that it is a question of physiological classification when you have admitted that sex is a spectrum rather than a binary difference.

She identifies and is generally accepted outside of sport as female. To reject that status for sporting competition requires a justification.

The justification of physiological advantage is specious, therefore opposition comes down to ideology.

Sorry if this is hard for you to accept.

 

[Mateyman]

It is disingenuous to claim that it is a question of physiological classification when you have admitted that sex is a spectrum rather than a binary difference.

She identifies and is generally accepted outside of sport as female. To reject that status for sporting competition requires a justification.

The justification of physiological advantage is specious, therefore opposition comes down to ideology.

Sorry if this is hard for you to accept.

What is specious about the fact that when the IAAF required intersex athletes to have similar hormone levels to other females, Semenya's performance was considerably worse?

 

[Rob]

It is disingenuous to claim that it is a question of physiological classification when you have admitted that sex is a spectrum rather than a binary difference.

She identifies and is generally accepted outside of sport as female. To reject that status for sporting competition requires a justification.

The justification of physiological advantage is specious, therefore opposition comes down to ideology.

Sorry if this is hard for you to accept.

Are you seriously suggesting that there is no physiological advantage that men have over women? I presume you're not, but it's hard to intepret a comment like "The justification of physiological advantage is specious" another way. Because the entire point behind separate male and female comps is physiological. There is no other reason.

So if you can't accept that then you're not much good in the debate.

 

[Demosthenes]

What is specious about the fact that when the IAAF required intersex athletes to have similar hormone levels to other females, Semenya's performance was considerably worse?

It's specious to claim that it's relevant to the discussion. Plenty of non-TS/intersex athletes enjoy similar or greater physiological advantages over their competitors by virtue of their genetic background, but we don't require those to be restricted.

 

[Rob]

It's specious to claim that it's relevant to the discussion. Plenty of non-TS/intersex athletes enjoy similar or greater physiological advantages over their competitors by virtue of their genetic background, but we don't require those to be restricted.

What sports are split according to genetic background where such an advantage would be unfair?

I don't recall separate steeplechase races for Kenyans and non-Kenyans.

 

[Demosthenes]

Genetic advantage is genetic advantage.

It's specious to claim that the advantage one woman gets from being born male is 'more unfair' than the advantage another woman gets from being born West African.

We may as well go back to the days of the negro leagues if that's your attitude.

 

[Rob]

Genetic advantage is genetic advantage.

It's specious to claim that the advantage one woman gets from being born male is 'more unfair' than the advantage another woman gets from being born West African.

How can it be specious when sport is specifically split along gender lines but not these genetic advantage lines you speak of? If there were, then your argument would have application.

Bottom line:
There are rules around gender.
There are no rules around any other genetic advantage (with the exception of weight in sports like boxing and weightlifting).

If you can't accept that - and by labelling the difference 'specious' you appear not to be - then your position is so far away from reality then you're not even in the carpark of the ballpark where the debate is happening.

 

[Demosthenes]

There are rules around gender.

And she identifies as female. So what's the issue?

Saying that her self-identity should be rejected simply because she has a genetic advantage that is no greater than the advantage many non-TS/intersex athletes also have is quite clearly specious. The argument therefore comes down to ideology over what constitutes a 'real' woman.

Your cognitive dissonance is really quite impressive.

 

[Rob]

And she identifies as female. So what's the issue?

So that's where you think the line should be? Purely what the person involved thinks?

OK, fair enough.

Saying that her self-identity should be rejected simply because she has a genetic advantage that is no greater than the advantage many non-TS/intersex athletes also have is quite clearly specious. The argument therefore comes down to ideology over what constitutes a 'real' woman.

Your cognitive dissonance is really quite impressive.

So is your bigotry.

 

[Demosthenes]

It's generally not regarded as bigoted when the object of one's intolerance is bigotry itself.

I think if you want to deny someone's self-identity, you should come up with more than bootstrapping and legalism. The fact that being TS/intersex provides a genetic advantage is in and of itself irrelevant to the actual argument about who should be able to identify as female.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

It is disingenuous to claim that it is a question of physiological classification when you have admitted that sex is a spectrum rather than a binary difference.

She identifies and is generally accepted outside of sport as female. To reject that status for sporting competition requires a justification.

The justification of physiological advantage is specious, therefore opposition comes down to ideology.

Sorry if this is hard for you to accept.

If Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner was still in his/her prime, would you have a problem with him winning the decathlon gold at one Olympics and then coming out at the next and winning the heptathlon?

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

The worst part of that race for me was Semenya standing there and flexing afterwards. I bet the chick that ran fourth was rapt, just rub her face in it a bit more.

Was there a single female on the podium? It looked like something from the 70s/80s Eastern block female athlete programs.

 

[PoopingHindi]

Was there a single female on the podium? It looked like something from the 70s/80s Eastern block female athlete programs.

there were 3 people who identify as women and thats all that really matters [/sjw]

 

[PoopingHindi]

well its almost time for Kipchoge to win the marathon. im going to go and get comfortable.


its been fun kids...i'll see you all in 4 years

 

[wadistance]

I'll see you kipchoge and raise you rupp. In Dr Salazar we trust

 

[PoopingHindi]

I'll see you kipchoge and raise you rupp. In Dr Salazar we trust

no even Salazar has enough steroid cream to make him fast enough to beat Kipchoge.
if he goes sub 2:08 i'll be seriously impressed

 

[The King!]

Shocking weather

 

[The King!]

Shame not finishing in the stadium

 

[Wallaby]

It's generally not regarded as bigoted when the object of one's intolerance is bigotry itself.

I think if you want to deny someone's self-identity, you should come up with more than bootstrapping and legalism. The fact that being TS/intersex provides a genetic advantage is in and of itself irrelevant to the actual argument about who should be able to identify as female.

Of course it's irrelevant. I can call myself Queen of bloody Ruritania, if I want.

But also, what a person chooses to identify themselves as is irrelevant as to what division in the sport they compete. The sport sets the rules as to how the divisions are set.

I identify myself as a free-spirit - I still have that child-like innocence and wonder when looking at the world. They won't let me play in the U/12s, though.

 

[The King!]

Can you send as many athletes to the marathon as you want if they get qualifying times?

 

[Mateyman]

It's specious to claim that it's relevant to the discussion. Plenty of non-TS/intersex athletes enjoy similar or greater physiological advantages over their competitors by virtue of their genetic background, but we don't require those to be restricted.

Yeah but we don't have sports for people who aren't genetically talented, so until such a time as we have classifications according to genetic talent, other athletes' genetic advantages are pretty much irrelevant.

 

[Mateyman]

Can you send as many athletes to the marathon as you want if they get qualifying times?

Nope. Same rules as every other athletics event I believe - i.e. 3 from each country. That's why lost of athletes leave Kenya in these scenarios to try and represent Qatar and other countries, because so many athletes qualify in Kenya, yet so few can be sent.

 

[GiantOrange]

Staying up late to watch the marathon and will suffer for it tomorrow morning.