CAS Rules on Caster Semenya's Appeal

Andrew Jones said 1 year ago
In light of Tuesday's long-awaited decision from the Court for Arbitration in Sport, many questions remain as to the future of Caster Semenya (note that Friday's Doha DL meet was the final one before the challenged IAAF policy is applied on May 8). One must wonder if DSD (differences in sex development) athletes in the 400m through Mile events will submit to modifying their body chemistry in order to compete in IAAF-sanctioned athletic competitions, though Semenya has been quoted as saying “Hell, no!” to this.

Another talking point has to be the..."selectivity" and narrowness of the IAAF policy where, as mentioned earlier, and under the new policy, it is only the historical event range of Semenya that will require an assessment of athletes' T values. Also note that Semenya has been running 5000m races in South Africa, though Semenya said recently she will not move up in distance to counter the specification of the IAAF policy.

As a means to creating a better-informed and respectful discourse, I’ve provided the Rainbow Health Ontario* link below, which provides a starting point as to the terminology and definitions that could be used in these discussions. As the preamble to this glossary mentions, these terms and descriptions are fluid, and will continue to evolve over time.

*Rainbow Health Ontario (RHO) is a province-wide program of Sherbourne Health that works to promote the health of Ontario’s LGBT2SQ communities and improve their access to services. RHO creates resources, provides information and consultation services, delivers education and training, and supports research to develop evidence-based practice and informed public policy.
Steve Weiler said 1 year ago
The World Medical Association urges physicians not to implement IAAF rules on classifying women athletes

"WMA President Dr. Leonid Eidelman said: ‘We have strong reservations about the ethical validity of these regulations. They are based on weak evidence from a single study, which is currently being widely debated by the scientific community. They are also contrary to a number of key WMA ethical statements and declarations, and as such we are calling for their immediate withdrawal’."
Reply #1
Andrew Jones said 1 year ago
Thanks Steve for the background information in your reply.

As you quoted, Dr. Eidelman's statement really points out the rather thin and "convenience-motivated" (my term) nature of the IAAF policy. For me, the IAAF "solution" was a very lazy and, quite frankly, discriminatory proposition that IMHO should never have passed through the CAS rigor. I have to wonder, though, if a 2-1 deciding vote on really seminal issue is really rigorous.
Reply #2
Steve Weiler said 1 year ago
I encourage people to read the very thorough Ross Tucker piece on this topic:
Reply #3


In order to post comments you must login or create an account.
By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.