Broadsheet sure if full of dingy, bat-shit crazy chicks.

How the fuck do you DROP charges that have already seen a verdict? The dude jumped bail, what the fuck does this have to do with the victim?

Do the writers of broadsheet have even the remotest understanding of some basic things, like the judicial system? This is an easy argument that even high school sophomores could make but Broadsheet can't.

Another male writer said that Broadsheet marginalizes feminism (and suspects that most of the writers couldn't pass a college level math or physics class); these pages are full of crazy, knee-jerk, half-ass researched pablum with such mind-boggling conclusions as to defy basic logic. I agree; not much thought going into these pages of late. Bad editing, too.

The only writer I'm going to read anymore on Salon is Greenwald, he's the only one with any insight.

The Democrats are hopeless as an alternative. The populace prefers the demagoguery fascists, the Republicans. I've written it a thousand times folks, but Americans are going to have become a third world country (and we are fast moving toward that direction) before the masses wake up. Sadly, that's what it will take. There is no hope in these two parties, and no hope in capitalism.

Yes, Semenya's medical results should not be released and yes, I agree she should keep the medal she earned.

No amount of insistence will negate the unfair advantage Semenya had at the World Championships. Harding neglects to examine the reason the IAAF has barred Semenya from future competitions: because she has three times the amount of testosterone as the average female. This translates to a huge advantage. Other posters are correct that there must be standards/controls/definitions of what constitutes "female" in competitions. Harding writes more like a self-righteous women's studies chick than a cold, calm let's look-at-the-data scientific analyst. If you want Semenya to compete, then, yes, get rid of gender classifications. It does not matter whether Semenya's condition is natural, as it certainly is. Natural does not equal common, and her condition is rare.

The other issue Harding neglects is how South Africa used her. This is the real crime, as they certainly knew what was going on with her.

Boy, most of you folks need a little crash-course in statistics. Whew! Yes, everyone is different, to a degree. Let me explain.

Semenya's testosterone level was three times higher than the highest range of the normal female distribution. This means that the level tested well beyond three sigma (3 times the standard deviation of all women tested). This normal distribution is very well known and is compiled over thousands and thousands of samples. Thus, statistically speaking, Semenya did NOT test within the female range (which is normally distributed about an average). Likewise, men's testosterone level is well known too, and it, like the female range, is normally distributed. But the two ranges do NOT overlap. In other words, Semenya's testosterone level fell between the two distributions.

Lance Armstrong may have higher hemoglobin, more testosterone, etc., than his competitors, but they were tested within the NORMAL male range for these compounds. This is the basis for all drug-testing: higher amounts that fall, statistically, outside the normal distribution. Just saying "we are all different" really makes no scientific sense in a statistically verifiable way.

Semenya's level was found to be naturally occurring, that's why she gets to keep her medal. If she were doping, continuous monitoring would show vast differences. Based on the other data it was concluded that she is intersex. Rare, but natural.

Get it folks? It's just basic statistics to catch cheaters.

Uh, no, I'm not confused. The issue of whether Semenya is a woman does fall within the realm of statistics. Statistics is one of the key tools of science. Several criteria were used to make the determination. She was examined by an endocrinologist, internal medicine specialist, gynecologist, psychologist and a few other specialists. The whole science of the determination of hormonal levels (titer levels) is based on statistics. So, sorry, Ilya, statistics played a huge role in making this determination. I am a biochemist by training.

Cheers!

I just re-read your post.

Math = Science. It's really quite that simple when you boil it down. It is the exact language scientists use. And statistically designed experiments and the use of statistics determines a lot of the conclusions. In the case of Semenya, when the result, the high titer level of testosterone was found, the result was examined against the normal distribution (which can be found in a database but in reality there are standards, normal distributions which are used with particular methods) for women globally. A one sided t test was probably used to make a valid conclusion that it was NOT due to error of the method alone. These types of statistical evaluations are done on your normal blood work whether it is cholesterol, hemoglobin, what have you.

The high result does not prove in and of itself that Semenya is not female. The data were compared with those of the other specialists in a report and then a conclusion was made. But, without a doubt, all sort of lab work was statistically evaluated in making some of the conclusions.

So to contradict you again, math = science. They really complement each other. Without math and statistics, science would be meaningless and not exist.