Slashdot Mirror
How To Prove Someone Is Female?
krou writes "Caster Semenya won the 800m at the World Athletics Championship in blistering style, leaving her competitors in the dust, but she has been thrown into the midst of a scandal amidst claims that she's not really a woman. According to the many press reports, she's believed to shave, is flat chested, has a very masculine physique, previously preferred playing physical games with boys, and shunned traditional female activities and clothing. Questions about her gender have dogged her entire career. Previously, acceptance that she is a women relied on simple inspection of female genitals. But now the IAAF claim that they want to conduct further tests to see if 'she may have a rare medical condition that gives her an unfair advantage.' An IAAF spokesmen noted that 'The [testing] process was started after Semenya made her startling breakthroughs — a 25-second improvement at 1500m and eight seconds at 800m, just some weeks ago.' I'm curious what the Slashdot community thinks: what can be considered proof of someone being male or female? Is it simply a case of having the right genitals, or are there other criteria that should be used? Is the IAAF right in claiming that someone should be prevented from competing because they have a rare medical or genetic advantage?"
If he/she sticks it in your butt, it's a dude.
Now he/she is able, and does, stick in your butt and you enjoy it, then you're a faggot as well.
In my opinion, people with flaws -- like genetic anomalies -- should be disqualified from participating. If you think that they should be allowed to participate, then would you allow a 3-armed man to participate in the boxing tournament? Do you think that having 3 arms would give the participant an unfair advantage?
The Olympics is not about helping people with genetic flaws to feel good about themselves. The Olympics is a sports competition that celebrates the beauty of the human form.
So, if Caster Semenya is proven to possess a genetic abnormality, then she should be disqualified. However, "should" does not mean "will". Chances are good that if she is disqualified, she and her African-American/African supporters will accuse the Olympic officials of exhibiting "racism" against Africans. So, the final outcome is likely that she will be proven to possess the genetic abnormality, that she will not be disqualified, and that the Olympic officials will suddenly become mute.
Yiff in hell, furfag. But please, continue fucking foxes.
Oh, that's right. I forgot there's only two options and no possibility of deviation from those options AT ALL.
Fucking moron.
There's a simple solution to this problem which no one has apparently figured out yet. Give her a mop and a bucket and stick her in the kitchen then go for a drink, if its spotless by the time you've come back then you can be damn sure that he/she is female.
Considering that there are plenty of creatures which can be hermaphrodites
There are exactly zero humans with this trait. There has never been a real person with a cock and a cunt. Your pr0n background is all fake. In this athlete's case, we'll have to wait and see. Sure, she's fugly, but then aren't most blacks? Let's give "her" credit for the achievements unless proved she is a man. For what it's worth, I've seen genetic "women" with a physique shame 99% of men when it comes to size, mass and muscle definition, and this athlete is well below what can pass as female.
Africans can often, in general (male and female) look more masculine due to having more muscle and less fat. Some of this, as I know, comes from slave "breeding" but even if the slave bit was untrue, I thought it was fairly common knowledge that African women can look a bit more butch than other women.
Breasts are more or less nothing than fat. The more athletic a woman is the smaller her tits. It's like that for all races.
Yeah she is fugly and definitely manish but I've seen similar women before, most of which are African. It doesn't help that the women can be big nosed and fat lipped, like the men. Those features are considered less feminine anyway.
Just like people can develop ambiguous genitals or chromosomes, some people develop a psychological gender similar to the opposite biological sex..
That would be a neurosis.
If they are taking hormones to support their neurosis then that'd likely count as 'doping' and they'd be banned for being a 'drug cheat'.
Otherwise they should enter events based on what you'd see when looking at their nuclei under the microscope.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Go out with a geek? What about Mrs. Torvalds and Mrs. Gates? Anyways, If it's a case of a sex change operation then throw "it" the $#@! out of the games but if it's a genetic abnormality, some sort of birth defect or something then this should not be pursued and just let him/her compete normally.
"she may have a rare medical condition that gives her an unfair advantage."
If it's a medical condition, it's fair. Deal with it.
Either that, or you have to create the Hermaphrodite Olympics.
Or we could just accept that people are the gender they say they are. There simply are no pure scientific definitions of male or female, and even XX females can have hormonal abnormalities that increase physical abilities. To discriminate beyond that -- even for transgenders, is simply beyond the scope of the Olympic committee, IMO. How many historical athletes could have had similar disabilities? Should we dig them up and strip their accomplishments as well?
Which brings me to my next point: I don't believe that "performance enhancing substances" should be banned either. Should a scientist be disqualified from winning a Nobel because he takes medicine for ADHD? Of course not. The accomplishments are no less real, even if he has improved his attention beyond a "normal" individual's level (which isn't uncommon -- just like some people with glasses or contacts can see better than 20/20). Yes, there are negative consequences to taking some substances, especially in quantity, but people should be in control of their own destinies. If they're willing to risk heart disease down the road for the sake of physical performance, then so be it. There are people engaging in other activities that carry equal or greater risks for much less noble purposes.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Give her an Ikea desk in box, if she reads the instructions she is a woman, if not he is a man.
wrong 1000%