I think it should be pretty simple, if your testosterone is over X amount, you can't compete with women. I remember a story during the 2012 Olympics of a born women that had very high testosterone, and it always caused a controversy, to the put the IOC was looking into setting a testosterone limit.
I don't disagree with you, but I immediately am forced to ask a certain question here.
According to our own government's
studies, white men are at a testosterone deficit as compared to black men. A gap of 15% on average is what they put it at.
"Mean testosterone levels in blacks were 19% higher than in whites, and free testosterone levels were 21% higher. Both these differences were statistically significant. Adjustment by analysis of covariance for time of sampling, age, weight, alcohol use, cigarette smoking, and use of prescription drugs somewhat reduced the differences. After these adjustments were made, blacks had a 15% higher testosterone level and a 13% higher free testosterone level."
Now, if we got to the point where we could easily and quickly gauge every individual participant's testosterone level, then I suppose we could just set up classes like boxing has weight classes.
But anyone who feels that using gender as a proxy for testosterone level is reasonable (and it is) should agree that using race as a proxy for testosterone level might be reasonable too. No?
There are also differences in musculature, running ability, bone structure, and ability to take in oxygen which helps immensely with any sort of sports. Whites are at a disadvantage in every one of these, and this couldn't be more obvious when you look at what the racial makeup has become in sports like football, basketball, and
Olympic sprinting/distance running in just a few short decades from the time when these all used to be pretty much exclusively white due to the social structure at that time.
From Forbes magazine's site:
"For decades, a bushel of developing countries—Jamaica, Cuba, Trinidad and Tobago, Saint Kitts, Barbados, Grenada, Netherlands Antilles and the Bahamas in the Caribbean and Nigeria, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Senegal and Namibia in western Africa, as single countries, have each produced more elite male sprinters than all of white Europe and Asia combined. Yet West African descended runners are laggards at the longer races.
Remarkably, the story of East African runners is the mirror image of the West African success story. While terrible at the sprints, runners from Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda and Somalia, along with a sprinkling of North and Southern Africans, regularly dominate endurance running.
And if you are an Asian or white runner? Forgetaboutit.
...
The trends are eye opening: Athletes of African ancestry hold every major male running record, from the 100 meters to the marathon."
So, I'm sorry to bring up race again but keep in mind, all that I have linked to and quoted here are Forbes magazine and the US Govt's Health Institutes - not exactly "Stormfront" haha, which is of course everyone's favorite website to yell about when ever anyone dares to mention unpleasant realities about this kind of stuff.
Not trying to be inflammatory, just honestly can't help but think about the double standard here. Almost everyone (or is it just flat out everyone?) in this thread seems to agree it is unfair to females to have their sports opened up to males, and have to compete with males - you've mentioned the testosterone gap as one reason why, and you're absolutely right to do so. There are other considerations, but most of them touch on the testosterone thing and are related. It's a suite of differences that are all interrelated and fed by the testosterone gap.
This is also why steroids (synthetic testosterone) are prohibited, of course. They provide an unfair advantage just like a large natural testosterone gap does.
But to bring this point back home, what I'm saying is, how can anyone who feels it is unfair for women to have to compete against men, possibly logically justify not feeling the same way about racial groups having to compete against one another?
Especially with an extreme example like a Korean runner having to compete with runners from Jamaica. Essentially, he never had a chance of winning and the competition was (in large part) decided before it began. That isn't fair or right. Is it?
And is it fair for white basketball players to be in the same league as black basketball players? It quite simply is not, and no one here can argue that it is without being dishonest. I'm not as familiar with football, but my understanding is that whites have been getting pushed out of that sport too, except for in certain positions. Likely the ones that don't rely as much on running, am I right?
Likewise, it is simply unfair for black swimmers to compete against Eurasian swimmers, look up the statistics, they haven't a prayer. Having been through Navy boot camp, I can
assure you that there is a genetic disadvantage for blacks with swimming. Whites (including myself) who hadn't swam in years, and never had lessons, still passed the very basic swimming test, while black recruits had to go back for a retry morning after morning after morning. This experience is universal. The remedial swimming class is entirely black or 99.999% black. Anyone who doubts this, feel free to look into it. I've heard that whites have greater upper body/arm strength though, so that may also have implications for weight lifting, and similar.
I know I harp on these issues a lot but I find them fascinating and I'm drawn to things people hold as taboos. I didn't mean to single you out, btw, Zorba. Just used your post as a springboard because it got me thinking about the issue. I promise I wasn't going to mention race in this thread until I saw that word testosterone and was reminded
Facebook
Twitter