• Bell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    This isn’t about the external genitalia, not sure why you keep going there. This is about the levels of hormones over an amount of time that is known to impart a muscular advantage. The IOC needs a formula for this to decide who can be in the class. This would not be a determination of who is female.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      So it is entirely based on hormones?

      I guess in that case, men with hypogonadism would fight women. Right?

      In that case, maybe they shouldn’t classify it between “men” and “women” classes.

      • Bell@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think the thing we are trying to regulate is the muscular advantage imparted by certain hormones over certain periods of time. Whether the person being measured has been labeled male or female doesn’t make any difference.

        • Frans Veldman@lemmy.thefloatinglab.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          If it is about hormones, why then also not test for growth hormone (GH)? People with more than average GH might have longer legs, giving them an advantage in certain sports. There is also Adrenaline, Cortisone, etc. also giving certain advantages. Maybe we should try to cancel out ALL natural variations, to make the competitions more fair. In the end, we can only allow exact clones from each other to compete to each other. And end up with competitions which equal to throwing a dice, because nobody can be truly be “the best” anymore, which can be defined as “possessing the best set of natural variations that makes this person a born winner”.