Talk:Caster Semenya

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

LGBT[edit]

Why isn't she categorized as LGBT? She's married to a woman! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3754496/Caster-Semenya-returns-home-heroes-welcome-Controversial-South-Africa-runner-gives-gold-medal-adoring-wife-look-mobbed-return-Rio.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.234.241.1 (talk) 11:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Besides the political / personal sensitivity of the whole article, defining her as LGBT necessitates defining her as a woman. Here you go again..... Jazi Zilber (talk) 15:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
As far as I am concerned, the ONLY important part is to have the central parts of facts well written and objectively. I do not think that adding more categories etc. is of the utmost importance. Even if technically, the LGBT category might be apt - I am afraid that some will find it objectionable one way or another. So no harm done for this categorization to be omitted.

That is ridiculous. Everyone identifies her as a woman (albeit with a special condition). She is even categorized as a female long-distance runner. So you can't have it both ways. She must be categorized as LGBT as well — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.155.128 (talk) 05:26, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

If she's intersex, then she's the I in LGBTQIA. So far she has not identified as intersex. Qzekrom (she/they • talk) 06:40, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Possible upgrading of medals[edit]

Apparently Mariya Savinova has just been stripped of some medals after being found guilty of doping, and that means that a couple of Caster Semenya's might now be upgraded. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/38931007, which says "Should the International Olympic Committee decide to reallocate the medals from the London 2012 final, Semenya would be awarded a second gold after she claimed the 800m title in Rio last summer". That decision has apparently not been made yet, but we have two IPs already making unsourced changes to upgrade Semenya's medals. Obviously that should not be done until it has actually happened and we have a reliable source to support it. I have reverted twice, but if this keeps up I might have to use a short protection, so I thought I'd better alert page watchers to that possibility. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

And immediately after I posted that, a third IP came along and changed it again, so I've semi-protected for a day. If the medals are awarded and we get a reliable source to support it, please give me a ping and I'll lift the protection. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
And now we have multiple registered users doing the same, so I have upped the protection. Sorry to anyone who now can't edit, but I can't spend all day reverting these people. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:46, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
We should complete the sentence I originally wrote based on the sourced new decision. The International Olympic Committee has not yet issued any disqualifications. If the IOC does disqualify Savinova and should become "On February 10, 2017, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) officially disqualified Savinova's results backdated to July 2010. If the IOC" And a tag to the paragraph. "Since it was the IAAF who brought the case against Savinova, it is likely Semenya and other athlete's medals will also be advanced." The second sentence is not sourced but a sensible conclusion to the situation. Trackinfo (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
I've done pretty much that, but I've concluded with "If the International Olympic Committee reallocate the London 2012 medals, Semenya's silver will be upgraded to gold" as that can be sourced directly to the BBC article. What do you think? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:18, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
No objection there. On further review, I see the 2011 medal reallocation will still be held up due to the ongoing Ekaterina Poistogova investigation which can be mentioned. Trackinfo (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Sure. If you want to write it up here with the source, I'll be happy to make the update. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Section on the intersex (alleged), XY chromosome controversy?[edit]

This has obviously become a matter of global attention and interest of late. It's not exactly clear to me whether a section on this issue would run afoul of WP:BLP, or otherwise invite highly objectionable contributions. At the same time, it's out there in RS and it could be handled carefully and sensitively. Thoughts? Cleopatran Apocalypse (talk) 07:46, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Even the New York Times now acknowledges she has XY genetic male chromosomes and that her's is not a case of XX genetic female hyperandrogenism as this Wikipedia article still incorrectly states: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/sports/semenya-xy-chromosomes.html
This Wikipedia article also incorrectly states that the IAAF rules apply to hyperandrogenous athletes, but (1) the rules apply to genetically male athletes with specific disorders of sex development and with testosterone levels of 5 nmol/L and above and who do not have complete androgen insensitivity and (2) the rules do not apply to genetically female hyperandrogenism and specifically mention excluding those with polycystic ovary syndrome.
No objections from anyone? This is a controversial area and the fact that it's not in the article already may have been due to legitimate BLP concerns. If no further comment then we can start on a section addressing this issue — clearly it is a major part of Semenya's notability at this point. Cleopatran Apocalypse (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2019[edit]

change : In April 2018, the IAAF announced new rules that required hyperandrogenous athletes"

to: In April 2018, the IAAF announced new rules that required hyperandrogenous athletes with xy chromosomes

The rules DO NOT apply to hyperandrogenous athletes with XX chromosomes. Clamcakes19 (talk) 01:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

@Clamcakes19: Not done your proposed change is not supported by the three sources given in the article. The IAAF rules do not mention chromosomes, only that eligible athletes must be female or intersex. An individual's status as female or intersex is not determined by their chromosomes. Qzekrom (she/they • talk) 06:34, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
The IAAF rules do not mention chromosomes but they do list specific DSDs as either covered by the rules (those that can only apply to XY genetic males) or not covered by the rules (those that can only apply to XX genetic females). That being said, though I think some corrections are needed in this article, I disagree with this edit request because the rules are not about "hyperandrogenous athletes with XY chromosomes." As athletes with XY chromosomes, those affected by the rules have levels of androgen sensitivity that are normal or less than those for males. That is, as genetic males, they are not hyperandrogenous and on the contrary more than likely have partial androgen insensitivity. IntOMIatrA (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2019[edit]

The sentence saying Semenya was born with XY chromosomes should be changed to Semeyna has hyperandrogegism. The sentence is currently linked to an article of a man's blog who is citing his own tweet that includes pure opinion. 2600:1700:6E90:52E0:5500:94EA:9319:41BB (talk) 21:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

If she were an XX genetic female with hyperandrogenism (as opposed to an XY genetic male with partial androgen insensitivity) then she would not be affected by the IAAF rules here:
https://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/documents/health-science
IntOMIatrA (talk) 03:09, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Levivich 05:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2019[edit]

Change: "In April 2018, the IAAF announced new rules that required hyperandrogenous athletes to take medication to lower their testosterone levels"

To: "In April 2018, the IAAF announced new rules that required athletes with specific disorders of sex development, testosterone levels of 5 nmol/L and above, and sufficient androgen sensitivity to take medication to lower their testosterone levels"

Reason: It is inaccurate to say that the new rules apply to hyperandrogenous athletes as some of the former rules did. The new rules do not apply to XX genetic females with hyperandrogenism related to polycystic ovary syndrome. The new rules as laid out in IAAF documents only apply to athletes with specific disorders of sex development (mostly ones that can only apply to XY genetic males), testosterone levels in the male range (above 5 nmol/L -- documents state with 99.99% confidence that women with natural PCOS hyperandrogenism have a maximum testosterone level of 4.8 nmol/L), and sufficient androgen sensitivity (that is if they are XY genetic male but have complete androgen insensitivity then they would not be affected by the rules).

This is based on the information under "IAAF Eligibility Regulations for the Female Classification (Athletes with Differences of Sex Development) in force as from 8 May 2019" here: https://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/documents/health-science

Here are some relevant portions:

"A Relevant Athlete is an athlete who meets each of the following three criteria: (i) she has one of the following DSDs: (A) 5α-reductase type 2 deficiency; (B) partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS); (C) 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 3 (17β- HSD3) deficiency; (D) ovotesticular DSD; or (E) any other genetic disorder involving disordered gonadal steroidogenesis; and (ii) as a result, she has circulating testosterone levels in blood of five (5) nmol/L or above; and (iii) she has sufficient androgen sensitivity for those levels of testosterone to have a material androgenising effect."

"A woman who has androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is completely (CAIS) or partially (PAIS) insensitive to testosterone, thereby eliminating (CAIS) or reducing (PAIS) the physiological effect of that testosterone. An athlete with CAIS is not a Relevant Athlete. An athlete with PAIS will only be a Relevant Athlete if she is sufficiently androgen-sensitive for her elevated testosterone levels to have a material androgenising effect. The benefit of any doubt on this issue will be resolved in favour of the athlete."

"As noted above (see endnote 1), the available data on serum testosterone levels in men and women indicate that the upper limit of the normal female range (including elite female athletes) is 1.68 nmol/L (95% two-sided confidence limit), the upper limit for women with PCOS is 3.1 nmol/L (95% one-sided confidence limit) and 4.8 nmol/L (99.99% one-sided confidence limit), and the lower limit of the normal male range is 7.7 nmol/L (95% two-sided confidence limit). Therefore, a concentration of 5 nmol/L is an appropriate decision limit for purposes of these Regulations."

"These Regulations do not apply to any other conditions (including, without limitation, polycystic ovary syndrome and Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia), even if such conditions cause the individual to have testosterone levels in her blood above the normal female range. However, such conditions may have implications for the athlete’s health, and diagnosis can often help to improve the conditions, avoid metabolic disorders, and possibly reduce the risk of later cardiovascular events and gynaecological cancers. A serious underlying medical condition should always be suspected if the onset of symptoms is fast and/or intense. In such cases, the possibility of an androgen-secreting tumour should always be investigated. All relevant information should be provided to the athlete’s personal physician to determine the appropriate treatment (the Expert Panel may make recommendations in this regard)." IntOMIatrA (talk) 17:43, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Comment: this is a tricky issue (in particular, a lot of people and even journalists seem to disagree on whether the rules only cover XY people or also cover some XX people at the end), and the only source I see linked-to above is a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. Per that policy, we should "not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source [but] instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so." Basically, we need to find secondary (other) sources and look at how they describe the rules and who they cover. -sche (talk) 19:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
The text change in this edit does not attempt to establish whether the rules only cover XY people or also XX; it just generally clarifies what the new criteria are and corrects the current sentence that says they are about hyperandrogenism. That said, the first three DSDs in the list (A, B, and C) only apply or are only clinically significant in XY I think. The other two listed (D and E) are less clear. IntOMIatrA (talk) 21:13, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
The Executive Summary to the case and a subsequent Q&A released by the IAAF clarify that the regulations are now about hyperandrogenism and chromosomes. I have added some material on this to the article on the basis that factual clarification is a permitted use of WP:Primary sources. I have also added contrasting positions - including Eric Vilain who is quoted in the section on 2016, giving a different position. Trankuility (talk) 01:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
That Executive Summary (https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Executive_Summary__5794_.pdf) seems to clear up any question about whether the DSDs listed by the IAAF only affect XYs or if they affect both XXs and XYs. Based on that, I'd agree it's clear that only XYs are affected by the new rules. IntOMIatrA (talk) 16:56, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Already added, but please be careful: the 2018 regulations challenged by Semenya were not about chromosomes, but version 2, published by the IAAF in May 2019, are. Trankuility (talk) 17:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
I updated the sentence about the IAAF amendment to include their clarification that with the amendment only 46,XY DSDs are affected. IntOMIatrA (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
The circumstances provided by the regulations mean that Semenya should be added to Category:Intersex sportspeople. Trankuility (talk) 02:04, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Done IntOMIatrA (talk) 23:58, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Claims about testes[edit]

In diff, a statement was added that Semenya had internal testes; the only source which mentioned testes was a Letsrun site (a weak source) which claimed "some believe" it, so I removed the claim. It was re-added with a citation to a Telegraph article from 2009 which claims "Australian media" reported such a thing; however, in 2016, the New York Times noted that such reports could not be verified ("Nor could it be verified, as reported in 2009 in The Daily Telegraph of Australia, that Semenya had internal testes"), so I've removed the claim. Stating in Wikipedia's voice that Semenya definitely has testes seems unsupportable. Some might feel a temptation to simply rephrase: "Some people believe that Semenya has...". But we need to be cautious here, as WP:BLP advises:
"Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment." -sche (talk) 00:52, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

thank you for you research, i agree that the claim should not be in the article. i found what i believe to be the original source making those claims, and it appears to have several other statements that don't hold up with ten years of hindsight, like that she needs "to have immediate surgery because her condition carries grave health risks". interestingly the article seems to have been deleted some time between october 20th 2013 and december 7th 2013 (the article is no longer available despite other sports articles from the same day being available online), though i could not find a specific retraction from the Daily Telegraph Australia. --Habst (talk) 23:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)