Out of Bounds? A Critique of the New Policies on Hyperandrogenism in Elite Female Athletes

Abstract

In May 2011, more than a decade after the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) abandoned sex testing, they devised new policies in response to the IAAF's treatment of Caster Semenya, the South African runner whose sex was challenged because of her spectacular win and powerful physique that fueled an international frenzy questioning her sex and legitimacy to compete as female. These policies claim that atypically high levels of endogenous testosterone in women (caused by various medical conditions) create an unfair advantage and must be regulated. Against the backdrop of Semenya's case and the scientific and historical complexity of "gender verification" in elite sports, we question the new policies on three grounds: (1) the underlying scientific assumptions; (2) the policymaking process; and (3) the potential to achieve fairness for female athletes. We find the policies in each of these domains significantly flawed and therefore argue they should be withdrawn. Keywords: feminist ethics, gender/sexualityThis summer, London will capture the world's attention when it hosts the 2012 Olympic Games. At the London Games, more than a decade after the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) abandoned routine sex testing for female athletes, a "sex-testing" policy will once again be in place. The change came in response to the case of Caster Semenya, the South African runner whose sex was first challenged by her competitors and whose spectacular win and powerful physique fueled an international frenzy of speculation about her sex. In the absence of a fair and transparent policy for handling these charges, the IAAF bungled Semenya's case at almost every turn, driving her into hiding to escape scrutiny and humiliation. As a result, the IAAF and the IOC came under intense pressure to rethink how to handle such challenges in the future.After an 18-month period of review, the IAAF developed a policy that will not return to routine sex testing of all female athletes but that is aimed at systematically responding to questions of eligibility once the sex of a particular female athlete is questioned. In a shift from earlier universal sex testing, the goal is not to determine whether someone is "really" a woman (as previous sex-based exams and tests were meant to do-inevitably failing, as we describeWe thank Carole S. Vance for her thoughtful intellectual engagement with an earlier draft of this article and Kirk Neely for answering queries regarding medical aspects of hyperandrogenism.

Natural Selection for Genetic Variants in Sport: The Role of Y Chromosome Genes in Elite Female Athletes with 46,XY DSD

“…On the contrary, a recent study of hormone profiles in 693 post-competition elite athletes suggests that serum testosterone is not related to athletic performance in women [19]. Despite the lack of support for the supposed effect of testosterone, the new regulations on female hyperandrogenism that now replace the rules for gender verification perpetuate the view that testosterone levels are the critical factor [20,21]. While the use of high doses of anabolic steroids has been shown to lead to performance enhancement in both male and female athletes, the regulation of these substances falls under anti-doping controls and is not relevant to the consideration of endogenous levels of testosterone in women [21,22].…”

“…It is hoped that the IOC Medical Commission will reconsider and release an analysis of any anonymous data they have not destroyed on past gender verification tests so that the conclusions presented here may be tested further. Certainly, no convincing evidence has ever been presented to support their assertion that hyperandrogenism is responsible for performance advantage in female athletes [20,21].…”

“…While it is accepted that exogenous testosterone is a banned substance under antidoping controls, hormone levels have no place in regulating female eligibility as endogenous testosterone is not a determinant of performance advantage. These current time-consuming regulations may also lead to unwelcome resurgence of innuendo in the media while athletes are temporarily suspended from competition [20] and to the coercion of female athletes into accepting gonadectomy and other treatments to which they might otherwise not have been subjected [16]. Our conclusions are supported by others who argue that these policies should be withdrawn on the grounds that they are not supported scientifically, are discriminatory towards women and place some female athletes at risk of unnecessary and potentially harmful investigations [16,[19][20][21][45][46][47].…”

The human rights of intersex people: addressing harmful practices and rhetoric of change

“…Uniquely, intersex people also face failures to acknowledge the validity of sexes assigned at birth. 88,89 Misconceptions often frame intersex as a third sex. 87 For example, in 2015, an Australian State agency saw no contradiction in proposals simultaneously calling for a third sex classification and promoting intersex human rights via a poster stating "sex is a spectrum".…”

The new IOC and IAAF policies on female eligibility: old Emperor, new clothes?

“…Worryingly, therefore, the aim of the new policy is to 'clarify whether women with this condition [excessive androgen levels] are "too masculine" to compete with other women' (Karkazis et al 2012, 3). This immediately smells of the pervasive gender policing in women's sports, of which Karkazis et al (2012) fear intensification, 14 and seems also to speak to older, structurally related ideological perspectives and mythological hang-ups, sketched immediately below.…”