SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In The Guardian there is a discussion on the participation of transgender people in the Olympic Games, primarily looking at Caster Semenya. Semenya, a South African middle-distance runner, was subjected to gender testing in 2009, but has been cleared to participate in the Olympic Games beginning in a few days time.
"It's a ticking timebomb," Daniel Mothowagae says quietly on a winter's night in Johannesburg as he anticipates the furore that is likely to explode when Caster Semenya runs in the Olympic Games. Apart from being described by many athletics specialists as an almost certain winner of the women's 800m in Rio, Semenya will suffer again as she is made to personify the complex issues surrounding sex verification in sport."
"The debate around hyperandrogenism is as poignant as it is thorny. In simplistic summary it asks us to decide whose rights need to be protected most. Is it the small minority of women whose exceedingly high testosterone levels, which their bodies produce naturally, categorise them as intersex athletes? Should their human rights be ring-fenced so that, as is the case now following an overturned legal ruling, they are free to compete as women without being forced to take medication that suppresses their testosterone? Or should the overwhelming majority of female athletes be protected – so they are not disadvantaged unfairly against faster and stronger intersex competitors?"
""She is proof of the benefit of testosterone to intersex athletes," Tucker argues. "Having had the restriction removed she is now about six seconds faster than she had been the last two years.""
"The Cas panel defined the crucial factor as being whether intersex athletes would have sufficient advantages to outweigh any female characteristics and make them comparable to male-performance levels. "
"Three months ago Tucker conducted a fascinating interview with Joanna Harper – who describes herself as "a scientist first, an athlete second and a transgender person third." Harper made the startling claim that we might see "an all-intersex podium in the 800 in Rio and I wouldn't be surprised to see as many as five intersex women in the eight-person final.""
(Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Tuesday August 02 2016, @11:46AM
it may very well be he is deranged, but he happens to be correct in respect to how title ix HAS made the schools dump a lot of 'minor' sports to have woman's sports... just a fact it was an 'unintended' consequence of the money aspects of the schools toeing the title ix line...
personally, i have problems with it: certainly like that woman have sports opportunities, BUT don't like that a LOT of 'minor' sports -both men's and women's- have gone bye-bye, like wrestling, MEN's gymnastics, MEN's soccer, MEN's lacrosse, etc...
we have a hugely successful woman's gymnastics team at our university, but no men's gymnastics; and while i certainly am pig-enough to enjoy fit young ladies rolling around in their bathing suits, i do appreciate the athleticism and strength of male gymnasts, too... too bad, i guess... similarly, a great chick soccer team (if great can be applied in the same sentence with soccer, which sucks), but no men's team; great chicka lacrosse team, no men's team...
(don't get me started on how they have watered-down woman's lacrosse with stupid chick rules...)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @12:20PM
I am an adult (30) male amateur gymnast, and I have to say that I'm sorry I wasn't able to do any of the basic gymnastics as part of my public high school (or other) life. Essentially, I am strong, flexible, and coordinated, but not fast. In elementary school, I set the school record for situps, and was top 5% for flexibility and pullups. In high school, I set the school record for pushups.
It took a long time before I found the correct exercise(s) for me as an adult to stay fit. Everyone needs something that they enjoy doing, including the people that don't like running. For me, crossfit was so-so, yoga was interesting but not challenging. The answer, for me, was "gymnastic rings", which I discovered 8 months ago. Gymnastic rings require phenomenal strength and flexibility. "Entry level" items (wrists to toes, 5 strict pullups, 60s plank, shoulder dislocations, etc.) frequently make them unapproachable.
The "entry level" exercises were never part of my middle-/high- school gym. We never did pullups, rope climbs, L-sits, V-sits, yoga, etc. My school didn't have a male gymnastics, wrestling, weight-lifting, or "throwing" team (the sports where being strong/flexible are critical). I'm not upset/mad, I'll probably never be competitive-level, but it is sad to see that the sports that I really enjoy and excel at were simply not offered as byproduct of "inclusion".
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday August 02 2016, @04:10PM
Personally I don't think any higher-education institute ought to be running these sports programs. It's another sink for time and money and how many stories of corruption have we heard from them again...? School is where you learn, dammit, not where you kick/swat a ball around. The fact that the overgrown children we call professional athletes make so much while teachers and firefighters make so little is a huge problem.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @05:08PM
i played certain sports in HS and under different circumstances i would have played in college and i was very serious about one of them. I have to agree with you though. we have little country schools where 18 year old males graduate with a poor education but being very skilled at a sport that 98% of them will never play professionally/again. It's just feeding off kids' future for money. I'm not saying there's no benefit to sports but let community orgs pop up and fill this need. If we're going to have tax funded schools they should be teaching something kids can use to earn a living. that also means leaving out non market viable subjects as well. If you can't bake a cake that's yo momma's fault, not bob and sally taxpayer's.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @07:43PM
Different perspectives, of course. School is either:
1 - A place where children can learn the knowledge/skills which help them live healthy/productive lives, and become good citizens.
2 - A place where children can learn the knowledge/skills which will help them in the workforce.
3 - A place where children are prepared for (1) and (2) because they are taught self-improvement.
4 - A place where children learn social/group skills.
If you believe that the purpose is (1), it seems just/right/good to teach them "physical fitness" (yoga, pullups, running, etc.) as part of general "care of your body". Sports & conditioning are a significant component towards not letting your body deteriorate.
If you believe the purpose is (2), the purpose of sports should be to "teach teamwork and communication" (like you will see in virtually any workforce nowadays).
If you believe the purpose is (3), the purpose of sports should be to teach progressively more difficult skills in an effort to show that "you can teach yourself anything".
If you believe the purpose is (4), the purpose of team sports is the same as (2).
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:10PM
Conditioning and sports training are not the same thing as the sort of money-sucking, corrupt college football programs I'm referring to.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 04 2016, @10:21AM
Different perspectives, of course. School is either:
School should be about encouraging people to be lifelong academics who are interested in or actively study the universe around them. Hitting balls around isn't academic at all.
Sports & conditioning are a significant component towards not letting your body deteriorate.
But doing these things in school is a waste of time. Most people won't bother unless they're forced by the school, and a few people will be humiliated by these classes. Then there are the diminishing returns. Even if we were to agree that the classes should exist, why are they so long, and why do they have focus around sports rather than simple exercise? Not everyone likes sports, and since this has nothing to do with academics, it's hard to justify.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:22PM
it may very well be he is deranged, but he happens to be correct in respect to how title ix HAS made the schools dump a lot of 'minor' sports to have woman's sports... just a fact it was an 'unintended' consequence of the money aspects of the schools toeing the title ix line...
Maybe the purpose of college should be something other than competing in sports? Cut way back on what gets spent on major sports, particularly football, and maybe schools can continue programs in other sports.