Out of the closet and onto the track: Sex Verification in the Olympics: All is Fair in Love and Sport?

By: Meghan Hughes

Sex verification testing at the Olympics was implemented to ensure that the playing field was “fair” and that men were not competing against women, as this would give them an unfair physical advantage (Fox, 1993). While creating a level playing field is important, I strongly believe that this issue is not as black and white as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has made it out to be. If the reasoning behind this testing is to provide equal opportunity for success, simply labeling athletes as male and female is not the right approach.

In 1968 sex verification texting moved from the invasive inspection of women’s genitalia to the Barr Body test looking for two X chromatin and those who fail this test are subject to further investigation (Fox, 1993). The IOC claimed that the “chromosome formula indicates quite definitely the sex of a person” (quoted in “Olympics Require Sex Test,” 1968, p. 48). While in years to come the sex test evolved even further to polymerase chain reaction technology, many experts still asserted that these tests were inconclusive, unjustified and negatively affecting the psyche of the athletes (Schultz, 2011). Despite these claims and the removal of mandatory sex testing of all female athletes, women are still being unfairly judged, tested and even banned for not being “woman enough”.

Instead of questioning whether an individual can be classified as a woman, I think the real question should be whether or not this is creating any sort of advantage for the individual. Furthermore, how is this genetic defect any different than the wide range of genetic advantages currently enjoyed by many Olympians. It is rarely noted that almost all Olympic male sprinters and power athletes carry the 577R allele which provides a genetic advantage in power and sprint activities (Enriquez and Gullens, 2012). Eero Mäntyranta, an Olympic cross country skier had a mutation in the gene EPOR that caused him to produce extra red blood cells, boosting his oxygen-carrying capacity by 25–50% helping him to win numerous medals, and yet, taking his medals away for him for having an unfair advantage was never considered (de la Chapelle, Träskelin and Juvonen, 1993).

Now consider the most recent sex verification scandal that occurred in 2009 involving South African runner Caster Semenya. Semenya won the gold medal in the 800 meter event at the Track and Field World Championships in Berlin. Within hours of this medal win she was forced to undergo sex verification due to her physical attributes that brought her sex into question. Never giving exact details on what requirements Semenya was required to meet to be classified as a woman, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) took almost a year to interpret the results and “determine Semenya’s sex” (Schultz, 2011). It is their motivation behind the testing that lies the real problem. Instead of looking to determine Semenya’s sex, the IAAF should be been looking to determine if Semenya had an unfair advantage over her competitors.

Based purely on the race results, it is evident that Semenya is not blowing away her competition. While her winning time of 55:45 seconds was faster than the second place finisher by two seconds, it was nowhere near the world record previously set in 1983 (Schultz, 2011). So while Semenya may not exhibit the characteristics of a typical women, she is by no means out of their league or competing at the same level as elite men. That should have been the answer the IAAF was looking for in terms of her eligibility but instead, they allowed her to suffer through 11 months of media scrutiny, rumors and ineligibility until, in the end, they announced she was eligible to compete as a woman. While the IAAF never released the results of the tests, there were numerous rumors suggesting Semenya was without ovaries or a uterus and had testosterone levels three times that of a normal woman (Munro, 2010). These rumors were never confirmed nor denied but the statement released by the IOC regarding transsexual athletes was brought into light. The IOC stated “athletes who identify themselves as female but have medical disorders that give them masculine characteristics should have their disorders diagnosed and treated” and that “those who are treated will be permitted to participate” (Schultz, 2011). This sparked speculation that Semenya was getting hormone therapy and that in fact, it was the reason she withdrew from a race in 2010 as the therapy had caused muscle weakness leading to injury (Munro, 2010).

Regardless of whether the rumors are true or not, the bigger cause for concern is that the IOC, and other organizations, require athletes with abnormal sex characteristics to be “treated”. Schultz (2011) states it well when she questions why is it that “genetic variations that affect autosomal chromosomes an advantageous endowment while those that affect sex chromosomes amount to a curse that can effectively drum one out of competitive sport?” In the case of polish sprinter Ewa Klobukowska who passed the visual inspection test in 1966 failed the chromosome test the following year, she had competed for years not knowing she had this chromosome defect and yet, still had all her medals striped and was banned from competition. A more tragic case involved Santhi Soundarajan who was subjected to sex verification after her second place win at the 2006 Asia Games where she proceeded to be striped of her medal and banned from future competitions following the test results. This destroyed her livelihood and she went on to attempt suicide because she was “mentally and physically broken” (Schultz, 2011). It begs to question whether or not these women were actually unfairly competing against women. Specifically in the case of Klobukowska, she had been competing against females unquestioned for years and once chromosome testing was implemented, she was deemed to be at an advantage. Clearly something needs to be done to change the standards of these sex verification tests.

The world around us is constantly changing and in the 21^st century, the presence of transgendered individuals is becoming more prevalent. The IOC needs to really consider what sex verification is telling them and furthermore, how it is affecting the athletes being tested. The IOC works to create a level playing field for all competitors but in focusing on sex verification, they are ignoring other aspects of genetics that offer the same, if not more, of a physical advantage. The real question seems to be so what? So this woman has more characteristics of a man than the average woman, lucky her? Michael Phelps has a wingspan three inches longer than his height allowing him to extend outward farther and therefore reach the wall quicker. Michael Phelps has a genetic advantage that allows his muscles to produce 50 percent less lactic acid than the average person. Michael Phelps has a larger than average hand size allowing him to move more water with each stroke. For Michael Phelps, the general response is lucky him, why does this not transfer to females with chromosome differences?