Introduction
Firstly, the rules of competition required that there be no competitor with an undue advantage over the other. This was simply the case when it was rumored that some men competed disguised as women so that they could win in athletic competitions. It was also alleged that intersexed individuals competed as women in order to gain an upper hand. It was for this reason that gender verification was started. The eligibility of a competitor to compete in any sporting event is decided solely on sex.
Previously, women paraded nude in front of a team of gynecologists in order to have their sex verified. However, this was deemed in dignifying, and a more discrete test was conjured. The new test, buccal smear involved a lab technician scraping off skin cells from a woman’s cheek and examining them under a powerful microscope for Barr bodies. If two X chromosomes were present in the cells, the mark of a genetic female, dark spots; the Barr bodies would be visible via the microscope. The absence of Barr bodies would denote the presence of one sex chromosome, the mark of a genetic male.
This is the test that Maria Patino was required to take in 1983 in the track and field championships in Helsinki. She passed the test and was given a certificate of femininity. However, in another athletics meet two years later, she took the test and failed thereby being barred from competing. It is this controversy that raises eyebrows about the whole gender verification process. Recently, Caster Semenya hit the headlines when her sex was questioned in the limelight. She was barred from contesting in athletic competitions until her gender was verified. In exploring the intricacies, modalities and difficulties in sex verification, this paper will employ the cases of Caster Semenya and Maria Patino as examples.
Difficulties faced by sex verification
Since 1950, prior to the European championships held in Belgium, all athletes were tested in their own countries. Sex verification picked pace in the 1966 European Athletics Championships as a way of alleviating rumors of men competing as women. Since then, sex verification has been performed in every major meet in order to level the playing field for the competitors by removing any unfair advantage. Even with the many years, the practiced has been done, it still faces difficulties.
Inconsistency, lack of precision and unreliability of some testing and verification procedures has been a difficulty in sex verification (Fausto-Sterling 6). Precision of a process entails the ability of the process to attain the same results when performed over and over again. On the other hand, reliability is the ability of the procedure to do what it is required to do. In the Maria Paton case, the buccal smear test was imprecise. The test was performed on her and verified her as a genetic female. Two years later, she failed the test and was consequently barred from performing in the games. A test with precision should get the same results when performed over time.
The shifting standards that athletic bodies use to verify sex among the athletes also pose difficulties in the sex verification procedure (Vilain 1). There is no harmonized policy that clearly stipulated the modalities to be followed to be followed during sex verification. Previously, a genetic female was one with two X chromosomes. This policy was undermined by the karotype test. The test, in Maria Paton’s case, showed that she was 46 XY. This implies that she was a woman though with the androgen insensitivity syndrome. For this reason, and notwithstanding the fact that the buccal test had verified her as a genetic female, she was barred from competing in athletic competitions.
Lack of recognized sex typing rules is also another difficulty facing sex verification. Athletic bodies have not clearly defined who constitutes a woman, and enough at that to compete in athletic competitions against other female contestants. In the case of Caster Semenya, suspicion was the main motivation for her publicized sex verification ordeal. Of concern is the notion that being muscular because of an androgen insensitivity syndrome is reason to render one unfit to compete against other women. Functional testosterone has also been used to verify gender in women. The response of the body cells to testosterone is implicated as aiding women develop more muscles thereby giving an unfair advantage over the other competitors. The evolving standards used to sex type competitors are problematic.
Factors relevant in determining the sex of a human being
Various factors are relevant in the determination of sex on human beings. The most obvious is the human genitalia. The anatomy of the human being is distinctive in the genitalia between the sexes (Jordan-Young & Karkazis 1). However, this is not conclusive because of transsexuals. Another potent factor is the chromosomal make up of cells. From a biological perspective, a male has the X and Y chromosome, whereas a female has the X and X chromosome. It is this concept that was exploited in the buccal test that verified Maria Paton a female in 1983 as she had two X chromosomes. However, biology further disproves this notion. This is because of the SRY gene resident in the Y chromosome. This gene makes a fetus that is formed undifferentiated grow male. This gene can appear on an X chromosome making an XX fetus grow essentially male. A present but impotent SRY gene in the XY fetus will make it grow essentially female.
The condition known as Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia is also relevant in the determination of the sex of a human being. As a result of this condition, the adrenal glands in the body manufacture many androgens. Androgens are partly responsible for the male typical look in males. Females who have the Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia develop the typical male look the fact that they have the XX chromosome and ovaries notwithstanding. This affects muscle development and the self identity of the prospective female. However, using this factor is inconclusive in determining the sex of an individual. This is because the person is genetically female but essentially male due to imbalances in hormones and unusually high levels of androgens.
Male/Female dichotomy and human sexuality
For instance, due to certain extreme conditions in the human body, there are individuals who possess attributes belonging to either side of the human dichotomy divide. For instance, in the case of Maria Paton, karotype tests found her to be 46 XY. By applying the concepts of biology, it is deducible that she was essentially male at formation. However, the inactivity of the SRY in the Y chromosome turned the fetus into an essential female. Her classification by the human dichotomy as a female goes against the principles of dichotomy. However, the fact that she grew up as a female and has all the anatomical constituents of a genetic female is enough to pronounce her a woman. The inactive Y chromosome in her genetic makeup casts shadows of doubt in the whole concept of human dichotomy.
Sex: Artificial or natural kind?
The differentiation of a fetus into either male or female happens naturally after fertilization. The action of the SRY gene in the Y chromosome determines whether a fetus grows as a male or female. For this among other reasons, I posit that the sex of a human being is the natural kind. If we are to argue about the involuntary things that affect the sex of an individual during growth, we still arrive at the supposition that sex is of a natural kind. For instance, the increase of androgens in the body due to Congenital Androgen Hyperplasia affects the sex of an individual. The extreme condition occurs naturally hence the idea that sex is still of the natural kind.
Pressure on male athletes to verify their sex versus the pressure on female athletes
The pressure for male athletes to prove that they are male is not equal to the pressure female athletes undergo in order to prove that they are female. The buccal smear test used in sex verification involves the viewing of cells scraped from the cheek via a microscope. The availability of Barr bodies implies the presence of two X chromosomes thereby denoting the individual of the female gender. The absence of the Barr bodies shows the presence of only one chromosome and this individual is said to be male.
However, it has been shown that even an individual with the XY chromosomal pair could still be female if the SRY gene in the Y chromosome is inactive. This was the case for hurdler Maria Paton. Such female athletes are subjected to more tests to prove they are female even if all the physical attributes point to the same direction. The use of the chromosomal test to verify gender might not be sensitive to some hereditary disorders. Such disorders are chromosomal abnormalities in women that might cause them to fail the sex verification test while males with chromosomal abnormalities could pass the test in theory (Dreger 1).
The use of functional testosterone to determine eligibility of women to take part in competitions
Recently, the International Olympics Committee and the International Association of Athletics Federation has ratified the decision to use functional testosterone to determine the eligibility of women to participate in athletics competitions. I find the decision to use functional testosterone to determine the eligibility of women to perform in athletic competitions not only redundant but also sexist. The philosophy behind the decision is sexist. The two athletics organizations argue that testosterone is simply a manly hormone. The truth of the issue is that both males and females produce androgens, a group in which testosterone belongs. The requirement that those women with high testosterone levels have them chemically quashed before they can compete is both intrusive and unfair (Dreger 1).
Men are generally taller than women. This is not to be misconstrued to mean that no women are taller than some men. The taller women competing with other women of average height have some advantage. This advantage could give them a better chance to won an athletic competition. Asking women with naturally high testosterone levels to be barred from competing is tantamount to barring taller women from competing because of the added advantage that their natural high affords them. The decision also has implications that could trickle down to school sport activities
Separate athletic events for males and females
Sports scientists have concluded that the best female athletes cannot run faster than the best male athletes. This is because of anatomical differences between the sexes. Male athletes have more testosterone when compared to their female counterparts. Testosterone is important in the growth and strengthening of muscles and the size of the heart. Through research, it has been shown that due to testosterone, the male heart grows considerably bigger than the female heart even under the same training regimes (Kolata 1). Female athletes also have more percentage body fat compared to their male counterparts. The extra weight would slow female athletes down if they were to be pitted against their male counterparts. For these reasons, I think it is sensible to have separate male and female athletic events.
Conclusion
The assertions by international athletic federations that sports are governed by rules have merit. There is also merit in the expectation that competitions be guided by the principle of equal advantage. However, it is unwarranted and unreasonable to purport to level the playing field by locking out individuals because of their naturally acquired attributes. Even if this has to be done, then it is only fair that the rules and standards be consistent and open to scientific review.
Works cited
Dreger, Alice. Redefining the Sexes in Unequal Terms. New York Times. 23April 2011. Print
Dreger, Alice. Where’s the Rulebook for Sex Verification? New York Times. 21 August 2009. Print
Fausto-Sterling, Ann. Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. New York: Basic Books. 2000. Print
Jordan-Young, Rebecca & Karkazis, Katrina. You Say You’re a Woman? That Should Be Enough. New York Times. 17 June 2012. Print
Kolata, Gina. Men, Women and Speed. 2 Words: Got Testosterone?. New York Times. 21 August 2008. Print
Vilain, Eric. Gender Testing for Athletes Remains a Tough Call. New York Times. 18 June 2012. Print.
